rely upon the decision of the Madras High Court reported in Angammal v. R. Sankaranarayanan , , the facts in which are similar to the facts ... Madras High Court in the above cited decision reported in Angammal v. R. Sankaranarayanan (1 supra) that the suit itself cannot be said
Maharani Shantidevi P. Gaikwad v. Savjibhai Haribhai Patel , and V. Muthusami v. Angammal , ).
30. The plaintiff altogether paid a sum of Rupees One Lakh under
Gomi Bai And Ors. vs Uma Rastogi And Anr. on 29 December, 2004
Equivalent citations
ratio in V. Tulasamma v. Sesha Reddi , , reiterated in V. Muthusami v. Angammal and Ors. , , the contention that limited right given to Venkamma under
decision of the Madras High Court in Ramaswami Pillai v. Angammal , . In that case the defendant had alleged that he paid some amount
Commissioner, M.C.H. 1994 ( 2) An. WR 132, and Angammal v. Muthupechiammal AIR 1976 Mad. 282, and the observations of Privy Council ... intention of the revision petitioner to divert the channel.
5. In Angammal 's case (supra), the plaintiff filed the suit for injunction
