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

2013 Supreme(Mad) 3132

S.TAMILVANAN
Pappa – Appellant
Versus
R. Muniappan – Respondent


ORDER

Heard both the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

2. This Civil Revision has been preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order, dated 27-9-2010 made in I.A. No. 251 of 2010 in O.S. No. 11 of 2009 on the file of the Additional District Judge/FTC No. 2, Salem.

3. It is seen that the suit was filed by the respondent herein against the petitioners, seeking specific performance of an alleged agreement, dated 21-3-2007, wherein the petitioners/defendants filed the Interlocutory Application in I.A. No. 251 of 2010 under Order 1, Rule 10(2), CPC, seeking an order to implead one P. Amavasai, a third party as the third defendant in the suit. In the accompanying affidavit, the petitioners/defendants have stated that they entered into an agreement for sale, dated 21-3-2007 by the aforesaid P. Amavasai, earlier to the alleged agreement relating to the suit, hence, the third party has to be impleaded as third defendant in the suit, however, the same was dismissed by the Court below. Aggrieved by which, this Revision has been preferred.

4. It cannot be disputed that the respondent/plainti








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