https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283422 The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's judgment and restoring the first appellate Court's decree. It confirmed the Plaintiff's title and right to possession of the disputed property. The Plaintiff did not need to seek a declaration of title, and the sale deed executed by Buchamma was deemed valid and binding. Defendant No. 3's claim of adoption was not proven, and she had no right to challenge the sale deed or retain possession of the property. en-us Thu, 05 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Nov 2021 14:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283422 The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's judgment and restoring the first appellate Court's decree. It confirmed the Plaintiff's title and right to possession of the disputed property. The Plaintiff did not need to seek a declaration of title, and the sale deed executed by Buchamma was deemed valid and binding. Defendant No. 3's claim of adoption was not proven, and she had no right to challenge the sale deed or retain possession of the property. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 05 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283422