The Single Judge credited the petitioner's prayer for an injunction to restrain respondents from interfering with suit property. Holding that any alienation pending the appeal is subject to its result, the Court decided no order is necessary and dismissed the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction )
Friday, the First day of October Two Thousand Twenty One
PRESENT
THE HON`BLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA
CMP.No.15894 of 2021
in AS.No.326 of 2021
1 P.V.RAMESH [ PETITIONERS ]
2 V.SEKAR
Vs
NARAYANAN (ALIAS ) ANANDHA NARAYANAN (DIED), [ RESPONDENTS ]
1 UMA MAHESWARI
2 KARTHICK
Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to injunction retraining the Respondents 1 and 2 their men, agents and any one claiming under or through them from in any manner attending and encumbering the schedule mentioned property which is the suit property in O.S.No. 99 of 2011 on the file of the Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Villupuram and the subject matter of this appeal (in CMP.No.15894 of 2021) pending disposal of the above AS.No.326 of 2021.
Order : This petition coming on this day for hearing upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of MR.SRINIVAS, Advocate for M/S.V.MYTHILI SRINIVAS, Advocate for the petitioner and of MR.D.KUMARALINGAM, Advocate (Caveator) for the 1st Respondent the court made the following order:-
The above application has been filed to grant an order of injunction restraining the respondents 1 and 2, their men, agents and any one claiming under or through them from in any manner attending and encumbering the schedule mentioned property which is the suit property in O.S.No.99 of 2011 on the file of the Learned Additional
District Judge (Fast Track Court), Villupuram and the subject matter of this appeal pending disposal of the above appeal.
2.Considering the fact that any alienation pending this appeal would be subject to the result of the Second Appeal, no order need be passed in the above Civil Miscellaneous Petition.
3.Therefore, this Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed.
-sd/01/10/2021 / TRUE COPY /
Sub-Assistant Registrar ( Statistics / C.S. ) High Court, Madras - 600 104.
TO
1 THE LEARNED ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FAST TRACK COURT, VILLUPURAM.
C.C. to MR.D.KUMARALINGAM, Advocate SR.NO.5648/2021
Order
in CMP.No.15894 of 2021 in AS.No.326 of 2021
Date :01/10/2021
From 26.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Interim Orders in this format PA (08/10/2021)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an order of injunction should be granted to restrain the respondents from attending and encumbering the suit property pending disposal of the appeal.
P.V. Ramesh
V. Sekar
Narayanan (alias) Andhna Narayanan (died)
Uma Maheswari
Karthick
P.T. Asha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
