more than two and half years prior to the decree. Infact it
is the contention of the defendant that before passing the judgment ... 2518 of 2024 and its batch
24. Infact this Court is of the considered opinion that the auction
purchaser Robert
more than two and half years prior to the decree. Infact it
is the contention of the defendant that before passing the judgment ... 2518 of 2024 and its batch
24. Infact this Court is of the considered opinion that the auction
purchaser Robert
more than two and half years prior to the decree. Infact it
is the contention of the defendant that before passing the judgment ... 2518 of 2024 and its batch
24. Infact this Court is of the considered opinion that the auction
purchaser Robert
Soundeeswari Ammal’ who is alleged to be the heir
of Perali Chettiar. Infact the temple is situated in S.No.74/1 in 10 cents ... defendant failed to examine the Inspector of
HR&CE. Infact during enquiry on 17.07.1978 the report of the Inspector was
marked with the consent
Soundeeswari Ammal’ who is alleged to be the heir of Perali
Chettiar. Infact the temple is situated in S.No.74/1 in 10 cents ... defendant failed to examine the
Inspector of HR&CE. Infact during enquiry on 17.07.1978 the report of the Inspector
was marked with the consent
Soundeeswari Ammal’ who is alleged to be the heir of Perali
Chettiar. Infact the temple is situated in S.No.74/1 in 10 cents ... defendant failed to examine the
Inspector of HR&CE. Infact during enquiry on 17.07.1978 the report of the Inspector
was marked with the consent
deed for a further period after 25.03.1998 and
the defendants had accepted. Infact the defendants have not even paid the monthly
rent ... structure
and the allegations to this effect in paragraph 5 was denied. Infact for such relief
the defendants had filed C.T.OP. 19/1998
deed for a further period after 25.03.1998 and
the defendants had accepted. Infact the defendants have not even paid the monthly
rent ... structure
and the allegations to this effect in paragraph 5 was denied. Infact for such relief
the defendants had filed C.T.OP. 19/1998
deed for a further period after 25.03.1998 and
the defendants had accepted. Infact the defendants have not even paid the monthly
rent ... structure
and the allegations to this effect in paragraph 5 was denied. Infact for such relief
the defendants had filed C.T.OP. 19/1998
deed for a further period after 25.03.1998 and
the defendants had accepted. Infact the defendants have not even paid the monthly
rent ... structure
and the allegations to this effect in paragraph 5 was denied. Infact for such relief
the defendants had filed C.T.OP. 19/1998
