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

1992 Supreme(Mad) 545

SRINIVASAN
M. Krishnappa Chetty and another – Appellant
Versus
P. E. Chandrasekaran @ Chandran – Respondent


Advocates:
N.Jothi, for Petitioners. T.Thirumaran, for Respondent.

Judgment :

This revision has been filed against an order dated 18. 1991 in I.A.No.13577 of 1991 in O.S.No.5731 of 1991 on the file of the 18th Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Madras. The said order is one granting interim injunction. Originally the matter was posted to 9. 1991 for service of notice. Again, the interim order was extended and the matter was being adjourned from time to time. Ultimately, on 210. 1991 the order passed was,

“Hearing advanced from 210. 1991 to to-day as per order in I.A.No.16229 of 1991. Counter filed, Stayed by P.O. in C.M.P.No.1341 of 1991 till 11. 1991.”

All that happened in the court of the Fourth Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Madras. Thereafter the proceedings were transferred to the file of the 18th Assistant Judge by order of the Principal Judge, City Civil Court, Madras. Then onwards the matter was being adjourned from time to time without any reasons being recorded by the Judge for such adjournments. It is now stated by learned counsel for the respondent that there is no interim order as the injunction order was not continued after 210. 1991. As at present, the interlocutory application stands posted to 111. 1992, the said application sh






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