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

2012 Supreme(Mad) 3155

G.RAJASURIA
Devendran – Appellant
Versus
Chinnammal(died) – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioners:P.A. Sudehkumar, Advocate.
For the Respondents:M. Palanisamy, Advocate.

Judgment :-

1. Inveighing the order dated dated 20.12.2010 passed in I.A.Nos.524 and 525 of 2010 in O.S.No.217 of 2004, by the District Munsif Court, Tirupattur, Vellore District, these civil revision petitions are filed.

2. A thumbnail sketch of the germane facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of these civil revision petitions would run thus:

(i) One Chinnammal and Chennakesavan filed the suit as against the revision petitioners herein-1.Devandiran and 2.Rajendiran seeking partition.

(ii) Chinnammal died pendente lite. It so happened that the suit was decree ex-parte. Subsequently final decree application was filed by Chinnakesavan. At that time, notice was served on the revision petitioners/defendants. Whereupon, they came to know about the suit O.S.No.217 of 2004 and the passing of the ex-parte decree thereon.

(iii) Consequently, two petitions in I.A.Nos.524 & 525 of 2010 were filed one for getting the delay of 1746 days condoned in filing the application under Order 9 Rule 13 of C.P.C. and another application under Order 9 Rule 13 of C.P.C.to get set aside the ex-parte decree passed in the suit.

(vi) Both the applications were numbered bythe lower Court and they were










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