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

1999 Supreme(Mad) 40

E.PADMANABHAN
S. Kannan and another – Appellant
Versus
G. Saraswathi Ammal – Respondent


Advocates:
T.M. Hariharn, Advocate for Appellants. Mr. R. Kannan, Advocate for Respondents.

Judgment :

1. The defendants 1 and 2 in O.S.No.98 of 1983 on the file of the Sub-Court, Madurai, who have succeeded before the trial court and lost before the first appellate court are the appellants in this second appeal. This second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 30.12.1996 made in A.S.No.54 of 1986 on the file of the District Court, Madurai.

2. At the time of admission the following substantial questions of law were framed by this Court:-

.(a) Whether the order of attachment before judgment made in the money suit without notice to the third defendant-judgment debtor is valid and of legal effect?

.(b) Whether the purchase of the suit site by the decree holder in the name of his son the 4th defendant without the sanction of the Court was legal and the Court auction sale is valid in law?

.(c) Whether the first defendant would be subrogated to the rights of the mortgagee or his payment to mortgage decree-holder would be of a volunteer?

3. Heard Mr. T.M. Hariharan, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr.R. Kannan, learned counsel for the respondents. For convenience, the parties to this appeal will be referred as arrayed before the t

























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