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

2010 Supreme(Mad) 4957

S.PALANIVELU
Angamuthu – Appellant
Versus
Saroja – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:N. Manokaran, Advocate.
For the Respondents:T. Muruga Manickam, Advocate.

Judgment :-

1. The petitioner is the 1st defendant in O.S.No.461 of 2004 on the file of the II Additional District Munsif Court, Bhavani. This is a Suit for partition filed by the respondents 1 to 3. The trial was taken up. The plaintiffs evidence was over and the 1st defendant was also examined before the court. At that time, the plaintiffs filed the petition in I.A.No.62 of 2009 under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC for amending the plaint to include a relief of declaration that the Gift Settlement Deed dated 1.2.1997 executed by the deceased Chinnasamy is not binding upon the plaintiffs and also certain pleadings with regard to jurisdiction and court fee.

2. In the affidavit, the plaintiffs have alleged that the 1st respondent filed an additional Written Statement, in which he has pleaded that his father Chinnasamy had executed a Gift Settlement Deed dated 1.2.1996 in his favour, that the said Chinnasamy was not commanding good health and was bedridden at that time and the settlement deed was obtained from him by misrepresentation and unlawfully and hence the relief of declaration that the Deed is not binding upon the plaintiffs is to be incorporated in the plaint and so the amendment pet

















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