Mrs. Meenal v. A. Ravikumar,

S.A.No.124 of 2016 K.RAVICHANDRABAABU,J.

Following are the substantial questions of law involved in this case for entertaining this appeal and for further consideration. a) Whether the Lower Appellate Court erred in law in holding that the plaintiff has not proved the encroachment made by the defendant upon the suit property when the defendant does not dispute the correctness of Ex.A1 and overwhelming evidence such as Ex.C-2, Ex.C-3 and oral evidence of P.W.2 and P.W.3 prove the encroachment?

b) When the correctness of the entries in Ex.A-1 was not disputed by the defendant, whether the lower Appellate Court erred in law in ignoring the same contrary to Section 15 of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Land Record of Tenancy Rights Act, 1969?

c) When the defendant had admitted the plaintiff's entitlement to 41 cents and P.W.2 also supports the case of the plaintiff, whether the lower Appellate erred in law in dismissing the suit particularly when the plaintiff was in possession of 4 cents less and the defendant was in possession of 11 cents more in the same Survey Number?

Admit.

19.10.2016 vri

K.RAVICHANDRABAABU,J.

Vri S.A.No.124 of 2015 19.10.2016