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

1991 Supreme(Ker) 48

PAREED PILLAY
Chathunni – Appellant
Versus
Visalakshy – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. C.M.Ps. 3711 of 1990 and 3712 of 1990 are petitions filed to substitute the petitioners as the legal representatives of deceased Chathunni (original revision petitioner) in the above C.R.Ps. The other petitions are filed to set aside abatement and for condonation of delay.

2. The revision petitioner died on 1-5-1988. The petitions for substitution of the legal heirs were filed on 20-11-1990. The petitions to set aside abatement and the petitions to condone delay were filed on 2-1-1991 and 7-1-1991.

3. Petitioners contended that there is no period of limitation for substitution petition filed under S.151 C.P.C. in contra distinction to impleading petition which has to be filed within 90 day? as provided under Article 120 of the Limitation Act. Counsel submitted that C.M.Ps. 3711 of 1990 and 3712 of 1990 may also be construed as impleading" petitions and as a matter of abundant caution petitioners have filed applications to set aside abatement and delay condonation petitions.

4. Counsel relied on Munnery Khan v. Kaushilya Devi (A.I.R.1981 Allahabad 240) in support of his contention that for an application for substitution of legal representatives in the place of the decea







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