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

2009 Supreme(Mad) 144

G.RAJASURIA
Tajdeen – Appellant
Versus
Abdul Muthalif – Respondent


advocates Appeared
For the Petitioner:P. Valliappan, Advocate.
For the Respondent: ---.

Judgment :

1. Anim –adverting upon the memo order dated 18. 2008 passed in I.A. No. 3835 of 2007 in O.S. No. 1081 of 2004 by the principal District Munsif Kallakurichi, this civil revision petition is filed.

2. The facts giving rise to the filing of this civil revision petition, as stood exposited from the records, succinctly and precisely, pithily and briefly could be portrayed thus;

The revision petitioner as plaintiff, filed the suit O.S. No. 1081 of 2004 for injunction as against the defendants, Where upon D2 filed the written statement, issues were framed and the plaintiff also adduced evidence and closed his side, When the matter was posted for defendant’s evidence, the defendant also filed chief examination affidavit, However, thereafter I.A. No. 3835 of 2007 was filed in the said O.S. for filing additional written statement under Order 8 Rule 9. The trial Court allowed the said I.A. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said order, this revision has been focused on various grounds.

3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner/plaintiff, by placing reliance on the grounds of revision, would develop his argument to the effect that he would be the last person to






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