P.Kannammal v. a.Mani
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court dismissed a second appeal in a property dispute. It held that revenue mutation entries do not prove title and upheld the lower courts' finding that the respondent held a better title via a sale deed from the original vendors.
What did the court decide?
Second Appeal dismissed; judgment and decree of lower courts confirmed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 26.11.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN
S.A.No.885 of 2013 and M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2013
1.P.Kannammal (deceased)
- 2.Unnamalai
- 3.P.Elumalai
- 4.Govindamma
- 5.P.Masilamani
- 6.P.Raghu(Deceased)
7.R.Chinnathai
8.R.Suresh
9.R.Priya ...Appellants
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether mutation of revenue records serves as a basis for declaration of title deed.
Whether the lower courts erred in rejecting the appellant's title based on partition suit evidence in favor of the respondent's sale deed.
Whether substantial questions of law arise warranting interference in the second appeal.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
P.Kannammal (Legal Representatives)
- respondent
A.Mani
Coram
RMT. Teekaa Raman
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court