Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

East to West on the Northern Side : 12.5 Feet East to West on the Southern Side : 12.5 Feet North to South on Eastern Side : 9.2 Feet North to South on Western Side : 12.5 Feet well within the Registration Chennai South and Sub Registration District of Padappai as shown in the rough sketch. 
                                  East to West on the Northern Side :      7.8 Feet
                                  East to West on the Southern Side :      5.9 Feet
                                  North to South on Eastern Side :         11.8 Feet
                                  North to South on Western Side :         10.4 Feet
well within the Registration Chennai South and Sub Registration District of Padappai.
SCHEDULE 'E' The property owned by the Defendant on the western side of his 'D' schedule property land had measuring an extent of 40 Sq.Ft area (rounded off to lessor https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis extent as the boundaries are uneven) along with building thereon comprised in New Survey No.484/20, Part, as shown in the rough sketch annexed to plaint bounded on the North by : Property belongs to Mrs.Vijayalakshmi South by : Kamarajar High Road – S.No.485 East by : Property belongs to Defendant West by : Property belongs to 2nd Plaintiff Linear Measurements: 
                                  East to West on the Northern Side :     4 Feet
                                  East to West on the Southern Side :     3 Feet
                                  North to South on Eastern Side :        10.4 Feet
                                  North to South on Western Side :        11 Feet
well within the Registration Chennai South and Sub Registration District of Padappai.

11.The Plaintiffs cannot suppress or evade paying appropriate court fees by clever pleading instead of recovery of possession it is stated as “Mandatory Injunction” only for the purpose of evading or avoiding proper court fees and also to institute the suit as though it attracts the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Sub Court, Tambaram. Therefore, the learned Subordinate Judge, Tambaram, was right in rejecting the plaint. Hence, this Civil Revision Petition has no merits and is to be dismissed as having no merit.