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

1960 Supreme(AP) 72

MUNI KANNIAH
Chikkula Chendraiah – Appellant
Versus
Tata Seetarammaiah – Respondent


MUNI KANNIAH, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision petition is filed against the order of the Munsif Magistrate, Khammameth, refusing to receive the written statement filed by defendant No. 5 as, according to the learned Munsif Magistrate, the right of that defendant to file the written statement has been forfeited on 2-3-1957.

( 2 ) A few facts need be mentioned for formulating the question that arises for determination in this revision petition. The petitioner is the 5th defendant in O. S. No. 74/1 of 1954 on the file of the Munsif Magistrate, Khammameth. This defendant was not originally made party to the suit. The "b" diary contains under date 1-8-1956 that the petition of Tata Seetha Ramiah dated 17-11-1955 for impleading him has already been granted and it was ordered that the case be put up on 31-8-1958. The next note in the "b" diary is of 3-1-1957. It is noted thereunder that the advocate of defendant has objected, as the copies of the suit documents have not been given and the pleader for the plaintiff has been directed to give the copies. The suit thereafter stood adjourned to 29-11-1957, and on that date the court noted that there was compliance by the plaintiffs pleader with the prev












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