Sekar, v. Murugesan
Case brief
What is this about?
In a second appeal, a High Court bench dismissed the appeal without admitting it. The court held no substantial question of law arose, emphasizing an earlier registered sale deed barred a later Will
What did the court decide?
Second Appeal dismissed without being admitted. No costs.
What the court decided
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATE: 1.10.2021.
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA
S.A.(MD) No.612 of 2021 and C.M.P.(MD) No.8175 of 2021
Sekar
Appellant/Appellant/Plaintiff
vs.
- Murugesan
- Jegan
- Vinoth Respondents/Respondent/Defendant
Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of CPC against the Judgment and Decree dated 30.11.2020 passed in A.S.No.61 of 2020 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Tenkasi confirming the Judgment and decree dated 20.7.2020 passed in O.S.No.79 of 2018 on the file of the Principal Sub Judge, Tenkasi.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the courts below committed any error in dismissing the appeal given the non-formulation of a substantial question of law under Section 100 of the CPC.
Whether the plaintiff could establish a valid title through the Will and subsequent sale deed when an earlier registered sale deed by the original owner existed.
Whether mere non-mutation of revenue records precludes a conclusion that an earlier sale deed was not acted upon.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Sekar
- respondent
Murugesan
- respondent
Jegan
- respondent
Vinoth
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court