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

1974 Supreme(Mad) 173

N.S.RAMASWAMI
Koneridoss – Appellant
Versus
N. Subbiah Naidu and others – Respondent


Advocates:
M. Veluswami, for Petitioner.
N. Sivamam, for Respondents.

ORDER.This revision petition is against the order in I.A. No. 282 of 1973 in O.S. No. 36 of 1963 on the file of the District Munsif, Periyakulam, which is an application under Order 22 rule 5, Code of Civil Procedure. One Seethammal filed the above suit for partition. There was a preliminary decree and a second appeal (S.A. No. 935 of 1969) against the preliminary decree was pending in this Court. The said Seethammal died. Koneridoss the present revision petitioner who is the husband’s sister’s son of the above said Seethammal first got himself impleaded as the legal representative of Seethammal in the second appeal (S.A. No. 935 of 1969). He had been so impleaded as the seventh respondent in that second appeal. At a later stage, Subbiah Naidu, the contesting respondent herein, filed a petition before this Court in the above second appeal for getting himself impleaded as the legal representative of Seethammal on the ground that Seethammal had left a registered will under which he (Subbiah Naidu) is the sole legatee and that therefore he is the only legal representative of Seethammal. The abovesaid petition (C.M.P. No. 14623 of 1970 in S.A. No. 935 of 1969) was disposed of by Ramanu








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