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

1966 Supreme(Ker) 101

C.A.VAIDIALINGAM
MEENAKSITY PILLAYATHIRI AMMA – Appellant
Versus
LAKSHMI – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. In this revision, Mr. V. Bhaskaran Nambiar, learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner, challenges the order of the learned Munsiff rejecting R. I. A. 344/62.

2. The plaintiff instituted O. S.285/60, Munsiff 's Court, Payyanur for recovery of amounts stated to be due from the sole defendant one Kelu Nair, on the basis of a promissory note, executed by the latter on 17 4 48. Summons in the suit was personally served on the original defendant and the suit came up for first hearing on 22 6 60. Inasmuch as the defendant did not appear nor was he represented by counsel on that date, the court declared him exparte and in turn, also passed an exparte decree in favour of the plaintiff.

The plaintiff filed I. A. 5/61 for transmitting the said decree for execution to the Cannanore Munsiff's Court. In that application he had impleaded, the legal representatives of the original defendant, on the ground that the original defendant died after the passing of the decree. The legal representatives entered appearance and filed objections to the claim of the plaintiff. They also urged that the original defendant Kelu Nair had died on 20 6 60, just two days prior to the passing of the e









































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