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) 2707

M.THANIKACHALAM
Muthulakshmi – Appellant
Versus
Kolandasamy – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:For the Petitioner:K.S. Kesavan, Advocate. For the Respondent:S. Kaithamalai Kumaran, Advocate.

Judgment :-

(Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order passed in I.A.No.1232 of 2004 in O.S.No.816 of 2004 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Erode dated 6.10.2004.)

The suit came to be filed by the respondent as plaintiff originally before the Sub Court, Erode in O.S.No.103/2002 for recovery of the advance amount said to have been paid to the defendant quantifying the claim at Rs.53,133/-. Subsequently due to the change of pecuniary jurisdiction, the case was transferred to the District Munsif Court, Erode and numbered as O.S.No.816 of 2004.

2. Before the transfer of the case to the District Munsif, as submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent, the trial commenced before the Sub Court on 1.12.2003 and the plaintiff's evidence was closed on 28.6.2004. Thereafter, when the case was posted for adducing defendant's witness, the defendant has filed a petition invoking Order VIII Rule 6A C.P.C. to file additional written statement raising counter claim, which was opposed. The objection was accepted, resulting dismissal of I.A.No.1232 of 2004, giving cause of action for this revision petition.

3. The learned counsel for the revision





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