Breaking SUPREME COURT REAFFIRMS PUBLIC DOMAIN PROTECTION FOR DIGITAL LAWS
New Delhi · Monday, 21 September 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law - free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2016-03-29 allowed

Lakshmanan & Ors vs G. Ayyasamy

Bench: 2 — <UNKNOWN>, <UNKNOWN>

In Brief

The appellants challenged a High Court judgment that granted relief to the respondent for removal of windows, despite the respondent not filing a cross-appeal or cross-objection. The Supreme Court held that appellate courts cannot grant relief to a respondent under Order 41, Rule 33 CPC when such relief was rejected by both lower courts and the respondent did not raise it in their appeal. Relying on established precedent, the Court set aside the High Court's direction to remove the windows, holding that the respondent's failure to independently appeal forecloses such relief. The appeal was allowed.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Civil Procedure Appellate Jurisdiction Easements Property Law Order 41 Rule 33 Cross-objection

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login