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

1998 Supreme(Mad) 930

E.PADMANABHAN
Kuppanna Gounder and another – Appellant
Versus
R. Sivakami – Respondent


Advocates:
Mrs. P. Bagyalakshmi, Advocate for Petitioners. Mr. T.R. Rajaram, Advocate for Respondent.

Judgment :

1. The present Revision has been preferred by the petitioners, being aggrieved by the fair and decreetal order dated 6. 1998 made in unnumbered I.A. of 1998 (SR.No. 1170 of 98) in O.S.No. 239 of 1986 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Karur.

.2. The petitioners are the defendants 2 and 3 in the said original suit. The respondent is the plaintiff in the said suit. The parties to this Revision will be referred to as arrayed before the trial court. The plaintiff instituted the suit O.S.No. 239 of 1986 against fourteen defendants for partition and separate possession of their 1/4th share and for other consequential reliefs. The suit came to be instituted as early as 17th November 1986. The 3rd defendant had filed a written statement on 212. 1991. The 3rd defendant had also filed an additional written statement on 111. 1997. It is not necessary to detail the case and counter case of either parties for the purpose of deciding this Revision Petition and it would be sufficient to mention that the contesting defendants put forward a Will executed by Palanimalai Gounder through and by which they resist the suit claim among other defences.

3. The plaintiff served notice on th











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