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

2019 Supreme(SC) 101

A.M.SAPRE, DINESH MAHESHWARI
G. Ratna Raj (D) by LRs. – Appellant
Versus
Muthukumarasamy Permanent Fund Ltd. – Respondent


JUDGMENT :

Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.

1. Application for substitution is allowed.

2. These appeals are directed against the final judgment and order dated 11.01.2008 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in O.S.A. Nos.299 & 300 of 2006 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court allowed the appeals filed by respondent No.1 herein.

3. The controversy involved in these appeals lies in a narrow compass. However, in order to appreciate the same, few relevant facts need mention hereinbelow.

4. The original appellant-G.Ratna Raj (since dead and now represented by his legal representatives) was the plaintiff whereas respondent No.1 was defendant No.1 in the civil suit out of which these appeals arise. Respondent No.2 is impleaded as party respondent in this Court by order dated 06.02.2014.

5. The original plaintiff (appellant herein) G Ratna Raj filed a Civil Suit No.131/1999 against the defendants (Sri Muthukumaraswamy Fund Ltd. - Respondent No.1 herein and Balajee & Ors.) in the High Court of Madras on its original side jurisdiction for redemption of mortgage and for permanent injunction in relation to the mortgaged property.

6. The defendants on being served entered their appearance









































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