1992 (1) TMI 350

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f Sundra Naicka Vadiyar arise out of two suits for permanent injunction based on possession claimed by the plaintiff in each suit. In O.S.No. 239/49 the plaintiff was S.N. Vadiyar while he was the defendant in O.S. No. 315/73 filed by Ramaswami Ayyar. The said R. Ayyar was the defendant in O.S. No.239/69. Both these suits related to different parcels of agricultural land of which the plaintiff cla....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ession, the finding on this question of fact recorded by the First Appellate Court in favour of S.N. Vadiyar could not have been disturbed by the High Court in second appeal. Alternatively, learned Counsel contended that even if it was permissible to do so, the High Court erred in re-appreciation of evidence and, therefore, interference with the finding recorded by the First Appellate Court is unj....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....proceedings by the Revenue Court when the matters were taken up by the Revenue Court on 25-6-1962 and dismissed on the basis of the compromise accepted by the parties who were present. Ignoring these orders Exhibits B-4 and A-2 and overlooking the logical effect thereof and basing the conclusion on the question of possession only on the oral evidence adduced by S.N. Vadiyar did cause an infirmity ....