In Brief
Akkamma and legal representatives of their predecessor sued for declaration of ownership of immovable property based on a 1972 sale deed, claiming interference by defendants. The trial court found ownership proved but dismissed the suit because the plaintiff failed to establish possession and sought only declaration and injunction. The High Court upheld the dismissal, applying a strict reading of Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. The Supreme Court held that where a plaint claims both declaratory relief and consequential relief (injunction), the suit is maintainable. Failure on consequential relief does not bar declaratory relief on ownership once ownership is established. The Court partly allowed the appeal, granting declaration of ownership but denying injunction and recovery of possession.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.