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

2006 Supreme(Mad) 277

A.R.RAMALINGAM
Rathinambal – Appellant
Versus
P. Rajasekaran & Others – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:For the Petitioner:R. Subramanian, Advocate. For the Respondents:A. Thiagarajan, Advocate.

Judgment :-

(Civil Revision Petition against the decretal order dated 28.2.2005 in I.A.No.1726 of 2004 in O.S.No.158 of 2004 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Kangayam.)

Aggrieved against the order of dismissal passed in I.A.No.1726 of 2004 in O.S.No.158 of 2004 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Kangayam by the said District Munsif on 28.2.2005, the petitioner/plaintiff has filed this revision.

2. Brief facts leading to filing of this civil revision petition are to the effect that the said suit was filed for declaration of title in respect of plaint A schedule properties and for partition of plaint B schedule properties wholly based upon a registered Will said to have been executed by the mother of the plaintiff and defendants viz. Valliathal on 13.11.1995 and that while PW1 was examined in part, the plaintiff wanted to prove the Will by examining the attestors after issuing notice to the defendants to produce the original Will into Court and she filed the present I.A. for permission of the District Munsif to mark the xerox copy of the said Will for the purpose of proving the signature of the Testatrix as well as attestors by examining the attestors of the Will on th




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