Mamutha Bai v. G. Ramakrisnan
Case brief
What is this about?
In property dispute appeals, bench rejected Benami plea post-1988 Act, dismissed claims of invalid family arrangement/release deed, and held adverse possession unproven. Appeals dismissed.
What the court decided
2024:MHC:1625
OSA NOS.251 & 258 OF 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
JUDGMENT RESERVED ON: 14 / 03 / 2024
JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON: 03 / 04 / 2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL
OSA NOS.251 AND 258 OF 2015 AND M.P.NOS.1 AND 1 OF 2015 IN OSA NOS.251 AND 258 OF 2015 AND CMP NO.6385 OF 2022 IN OSA NO.258 OF 2015
OSA NO.251 OF 2015
1.Smt.Mamutha Bai (Deceased)
2.J.Latha 3.J.Indira Priyadarshini 4.J.Jayashree 5.J.Venkateswara Rao (Appellants 2 to 5 brought on record as LRs' of the deceased appellant No.1 vide order of this Court dated 21.10.2016 made in OSA No.251 & 258 of 2015)
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the plea of Benami is available to defendants under The Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988?
Whether defendants perfected title through unproven family arrangement and unregistered release deed?
Whether defendants perfected title by adverse possession?
Parties & counsel
- respondent
G.RAMAKRISHNAN
- appellant
G.SUBRAMANIAN
- respondent
G.JAYARAMAN (LRS)
- respondent
SMT.MAMUTHA BAI (LRS)
- respondent
J.LATHA
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court