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

2000 Supreme(Mad) 345

S.S.SUBRAMANI
Seethai Ammal and 5 others – Appellant
Versus
V. C. Vikundam and 5 others – Respondent


Advocates:
Mr. Y.K. Rajagopal, Advocate for Petitioners. Mr. V. Swaminathan, Advocate
for Respondent.

Judgment :

1. Legal heirs of defendant in O.S. No. 22 of 1997 on the file of District Munsif Court, Vilathikulam are the revision petitioners herein, Suit filed by plaintiffs was one for recovery of possession with arrears of rent. In the plaint it is alleged that originally defendant was tenant who agreed to pay Rs. 625 per month as rent and defendant defaulted in paying the same and he is liable to be evicted. Notice was issued terminating tenancy.

2. In the written statement filed by deceased defendant he admitted that he has taken only vacant site and put up construction 35 years prior to the

3. institution of the suit, but he agreed that he is liable to pay Rs. 625 as monthly rent. He also questioned the validity of the notice. He prayed for dismissal of the suit.

4. Case was posted in the list and since defendant did not appear, ex parte decree was passed.

5. Defendant himself filed an application to set aside the ex parte decree and pending application he died. Petitioners are impleaded as additional petitioners. An order was passed allowing the application on condition that petitioners should pay Rs. 150 towards cost on or before 6. 1999, failing which it was directed



















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