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

1988 Supreme(Mad) 278

RATNAM
Chinnappan – Appellant
Versus
Ramachandran – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:Bhagirathi Narayanan, T.N. Rajagopalan, Advocates.

Judgment :-

The plaintiff in O.S. 12 of 1982, Sub-Court, Pattukotai, is the appellant in this civil miscellaneous appeal. The appellant instituted that suit against the respondent herein and others praying for the relief of partition and separate possession of his one-fourth share in the A and B schedule properties. That suit is pending. In I.A. 219 of 1983 in O.S. 12 of 1982, filed under O.11, R.14 and S.151, C.P.C. the petitioner prayed that the respondent may be directed to produce into court certain documents detailed in the application. On 12-4-1983, the learned Subordinate Judge passed an order directing the respondent herein to produce the documents set out in I.A. 219 of 1983. Later on 13-9-1983, learned counsel for the respondent made an endorsement to the effect that the documents are not available. Thereupon, the appellant filed I.A. 562 of 1983 in O.S. 12 of 1982, purporting to be under O.11, R.21, C.P.C. praying that the defence of the respondent in the suit should be struck out and that he should be placed in such a position as if he had not defended the claim of the appellant in the suit for partition in O.S. 12 of 1982 instituted by the appellant. In the affidavit f










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