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

1981 Supreme(Mad) 523

VENUGOPAL
Abdul Azeez Sahib – Appellant
Versus
Dhanabagiammal – Respondent


Advocates:
V. Selvaraj, for Petitioner; T.S. Ramaswami, for Respondents.

Judgement

ORDER :- One of the legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff who has obtained a decree for costs against the defendants has filed this civil revision petition. The defendants and the other legal representatives of the deceased decree holder are the respondents.

2. One Abdul Sukkoor Sahib filed a suit in O.S. No. 712 of 1966 on the file of the District Munsif. Tindivanam, for injunction against the two defendants (respondents 1 and 15 herein) restraining them from interfering with plaintiff's possession and enjoyment of the suit properties. The suit was dismissed, and on appeal, the suit was decreed and the plaintiff was awarded costs. The plaintiff died on 17-5-1971. Without impleading his legal representatives, the appeal was disposed of on 15-7-1971. The plaintiff's power agent filed an execution petition for recovery of costs and the petition was dismissed since batta was not paid. A second execution petition was filed by the power agent of the legal heirs of the plaintiff. In E.A. No 804 of 1973, by consent, the legal representatives of the plaintiff were added as parties and they are the petitioner and respondents 2 to 14 herein. In E.A. No. 805 of 1973, the po



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