GOPALA KRISHNAN NAIR, ELIPE DHARMA RAO
SUBBALAKSHMI – Appellant
Versus
R. PALANI SWAMY – Respondent
( 2 ) MR. T. C. KRISHNAN, the learned counsel appearing for the Revision Petitioner submitted that the Claims Tribunal ought to have allowed the application in toto but the claims Tribunal committed illegality in allowing the Interlocutory application in part, having convinced with the material available on record, permitted the petitioner to withdraw Rs. 30,000-00 and directed to fix (sic. keep) the balance amount in FD for a period of one year. The Revision Petitioner submitted before the Claims Tribunal that due to severe drought conditions prevailing for the last five years she incurred several debts and also the amount lying in the fixed deposit is very much necessary to construct a house in the place of dilapidated tiled house.
( 3 ) THE learned counsel for the Revi
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.