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

1971 Supreme(Mad) 673

MAHARAJAN
Nanja Naicken – Appellant
Versus
Rangammal – Respondent


Advocates:
K. Sarvabhauman and A. K. Kumaraswami, for Petitioner; C. Chinnaswami and P.M. Umapathi, for Respondent.

Judgement

ORDER:- The sixth defendant has filed this civil revision petition against the order of the Additional District Munsif, Erode, dismissing his application (I.A. No.3587 of 1969) filed under Sections 151, 152 and 153, C.P. Code, praying to amend the preliminary decree granted in O.S.853 of 1965, by giving him the right of partition and separate possession of his share.

2. One Rangammal instituted the suit against four defendants for partition and separate possession of her three-fourths share in the plaint-schedule property. On the 10th July 1969, a preliminary decree was passed directing division by metes and bounds of the plaint schedule property into 32 shares with reference to good and bad soil and directing allotment to the plaintiff of 24/32 share, and to the first defendant of 1/32 share. Subsequent to the preliminary decree, the plaintiff applied in I.A. No.884 of 1968 for impleading three persons, of whom the petitioner was one, as defendants 6 to 8, on the ground that they were understood to have a share in the property forming the subject-matter of the preliminary decree. This petition was ordered by the court below. Summons was issued to the sixth defendant the pe





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