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

2004 Supreme(Mad) 670

S.SARDAR ZACKRIA HUSSAIN
Ramasamy Pandithar – Appellant
Versus
Ramalinga Kounder – Respondent


Advocates:
R.Yashod Vardhan, for Petitioner.
K.Mani, for Respondent.

ORDER: The revision petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.47 of 1998 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Villupuram. The revision is filed against the dismissal of the amendment petition I.A.No.304 of 2000 in A.S.No.131 of 1999 on the file of the II Additional Sub Court, Villupuram, to amend the plaint for delivery of vacant possession of the plaint ‘B’ schedule property and stating that it was trespassed by the defendant after filing of the suit, as per order dated 15.2.2001.

2. In the affidavit filed in support of the said amendment petition, the plaintiff has stated that after filing of the suit, the respondent/defendant trespassed into a portion of his property on the South and therefore, recovery of possession is

also to be sought for, for which purpose, the plaintiff filed the amendment petition as stated in the petition.

3. The amendment petition was opposed in the counter that though the plaintiff was fully aware, even at the stage of trial that the defendant is in possession of ‘B’ schedule property, no step has been taken to amend the plaint at that stage. No petition was filed to amend the plaint seeking recovery of possession before evidence was let in or before the











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