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

1997 Supreme(Kar) 114

S.VENKATARAMAN
MOHAMMED SHUKUR – Appellant
Versus
JAYAMMA – Respondent


Advocates:
M.L.DAYANAND KUMAR, RAMAKANTH V.DESAI

S. VENKATARAMAN, J.

( 1 ) THESE revision petitions are filed by the tenant questioning the order of the munsiff allowing an application filed by the respondents under Section 151, Civil Procedure Code to amend the cause title in the order by bringing the respondents as legal representatives of the deceased petitioner in h. r. c. 19 of 1985. That order of the munsiff which was challenged by the petitioner before the district judge has been confirmed by him.

( 2 ) THE undisputed facts giving rise to the application undersection 151 filed by the respondents are briefly as hereunder. The deceased ramesh kuberappa pastay had filed a petition in h. r. c. 19 of 1985 seeking eviction of the petitioner on various grounds. The evidence of both parties was completed by December 1988 and the matter was at the stage of arguments. The original petitioner died on 27-5-1989. The respondents filed an application under order 22, Rule 3, Civil Procedure Code to bring them on record on 9-6-1989 after serving a copy on the petitioner's advocate. That application was filed within time. No specific order allowing that application was passed by the court. The petitioner did not file any objection to that a







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