SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(SC) 817

V.N.KHARE, S.N.VARIAVA
Pakeerappa Rai – Appellant
Versus
Seethamma Hengsu – Respondent


ORDER

It is alleged that Yajaman took a loan of Rs. 1000/- from Mahabala Rai (hereinafter referred to as the creditor ) on executing pronote for purposes of filing a suit for recovery of possession of land from Ramanna Rai and other members of the kavaru. On 1.12.60, Yajaman filed a suit being O.S. No. 459/1960 for recovery of possession of the said property from Ramanna Rai and others. Seethamma was also made one of the defendants in the suit. When the suit came up for final hearing, plaintiff Yajaman did not prosecute the suit. Under such circumstances, Seethamma filed an application that she may be transposed as the plaintiff in the suit. The said application was opposed by other defendants, including the plaintiff who filed a counter affidavit (Ex. A-49). Consequently, the application for transposition filed by Seethamma was dismissed. On 25-10-1962 the creditor filed O.S. No. 592/1962 against Yajaman representing kavaru for recovery of the principal amount of Rs.1000/- and interest against pronote (Ex. A-39). Yajaman did not contest the suit and the Court decreed the suit ex parte on 27-11-1962 - In execution proceeding brought by the creditor the suit property was attached.





Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top