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

2001 Supreme(Mad) 201

P.SATHASIVAM
MUTHULINGAM – Appellant
Versus
GANGAI AMMAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appearing Parties:A. Muthu Kumar, K. Srinivasan Indrajeeth Shah, Advocates.

Judgment :

P. SATHASIVAM, J.

( 1 ) THE above civil revision petition has been directed against the order of the learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Kattumannarkoil dated 13. 11. 2000 in I. A. No. 304 of 2000 in o. S. No. 18 of 2000 wherein the learned Judge set aside the ex parte order dated 20. 12. 1999 passed against the third defendant.

( 2 ) THE petitioner herein instituted a civil suit in O. S. No. 1083 of 1988 on the file of the District Munsif, Chidambaram against the respondent herein and 3 others for partition and separate possession of his 1/3rd share in the suit properties. Except the third defendant, other defendants entered appearance through their counsel and filed written statement. Since the third defendant was said to be residing at Singapore, summons were taken to his Singapore address. Since summons were returned unserved because the third defendant was not at Singapore, at the request of the plaintiff, the learned District Munsif, chidambaram granted service of noiice of publication in Tamil daily; accordingly paper publication was effected in 'dina Malar', Cuddalore edition having circulation where the suit properties are situated and also at Pondi













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