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

2005 Supreme(Mad) 1201

M.THANIKACHALAM
Jeya – Appellant
Versus
Sundaram Iyyar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:For the Petitioner:P. Jeyapaul, Advocate. For the Respondent:S. Meenakshisundaram, Advocate.

Judgment :-

(Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as against the order and decretal order of the learned Additional District Munsif, Tiruchendur in I.A.No.126 of 2004 in O.S.No.110 of 2002, dated 29.3.2004.)

The defendant, who was unsuccessful before the trial Court in resisting the application filed by the respondent/plaintiff to amend the plaint, is the revision petitioner.

2. On 4.8.2002, the plaintiff/respondent has filed the suit in O.S.No.110 of 2002, on the file of the District Munsif, Tiruchendur for declaration that the debt borrowed on mortgage, dated 7.2.1996, is discharged in view of the deposit of the amount of Rs.10,000/= i.e. for redemption, which was opposed, contending that the documents relied on by the plaintiff, are inadmissible in evidence. When the case was posted for judgment, after the closure of evidence, the plaintiff has filed I.A.No.33 of 2004, to amend the plaint, in order to include the prayer for recovery of possession, which was allowed on 6.2.2004. Thereafter, the learned Additional District Munsif, hearing both sides, adjourned the case to 22.3.2004 for judgment and just two days before the judgment is to be pr

























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