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

2005 Supreme(Mad) 569

N.KANNADASAN
Ramesh Ramanujam & Others – Appellant
Versus
Varadammal& Others – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:For The Petitioners:M. Balasubramanian, Advocate. For The Respondents:R. Viduthalai, Advocate.

Judgment :-

The above revision is filed challenging the order dated 23.7.2004 passed by the VI Addl. Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai in C.M.P.No.615 of 2004 in A.S.No.36 of 2003 rejecting the application filed by the petitioners herein seeking to amend the plaint.

2. The petitioners herein have filed a suit in O.S.No.4589 of 1990 on the file of the First Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai claiming the relief for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants 1 and 2 from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiffs of the suit B schedule property. The suit was dismissed on 19.9.2002. One of the reasons among the other reasons for the dismissal of the suit was that the plaintiffs have not chosen to claim declaration of title in the suit property. Under the said circumstances, the application to amend the plaint was filed during the pendency of the appeal in A.S.No.36 of 2003. Even though the appeal was filed during the month of December, 2002, but later on numbered as A.S.No.36 of 2003. The subsequent application seeking amendment under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC was filed on 5.4.2004, which was dismissed, against which the above revision has been filed.

3. L
















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