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

1999 Supreme(Kar) 130

T.N.VALLINAYAGAM
SHIVAPPA BASAVANTAPPA DEVARAVAR (DECEASED) – Appellant
Versus
BABAJAN – Respondent


( 1 ) PERMISSION is sought for filing the appeal saying that the original appellant died and he was not aware of the decree being passed against him. His sons having come to know about the non-filing of the second appeal they have come forward with the present appeal along with an application to condone the delay in filing.

( 2 ) THE suit was filed against one Shivappa Basavantappa Devaravar for injunction restraining the said Shivappa or anybody claiming under him or on his behalf from interfering or obstructing with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property. Injunction was granted by the Trial court and injunction came to be confirmed by the First Appellate Court. In this appeal the deceased man through his L. R. want to prosecute the suit.

( 3 ) APPLYING the principles of "actio personalis moritur cum persona", injunction is a personal remedy against a person, in particular, the defendant. Therefore, the very prayer itself makes it clear that it is a restriction against that person (defendant) or his agents or his men or anybody claiming under him or through him. This is the usual format in an injunction suit. Once a man dies, the cause of action dies with him and



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