V.M.VELUMANI
Hawva Nachiyar – Appellant
Versus
Balkish Beevi Ammal – Respondent
The appellants are the respondents 16 and 17 in A.S.No.119/98 and they are the wife and son of Abdul Samath, respectively, the first defendant in O.S.No.57/96 and the first respondent in A.S.No.119/98, who died pending A.S.No.119/98. The first respondent is the plaintiff in O.S.No.57/96 and the appellant in A.S.No.119/98. The respondents 2 to 15 are purchasers of suit properties from Abdul Samath, the first defendant and his step mother. The suit in O.S.No.57/96 was dismissed after trial and A.S.No.119/98 filed by first respondent/plaintiff was allowed. Against the Judgment and decree, dated 31.3.2006, made in A.S.No.119/98, passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Thanjavur, the present second appeal has been filed.
2. The appellants herein, who have filed this second appeal are the legal representatives of first defendant, Abdul Samath, who were impleaded as respondents 16 and 17 in A.S.No.119 of 1998.
3. For the sake of convenience, the first defendant in the suit, namely, Abdul Samath since deceased is referred to as the first defendant.
4. The case of the first respondent/plaintiff:
(i) She is the wife of Abdul Samath, the first defendant in the suit (since dec
Govindaraj Vs. Ramadoss reported in 2011 (3) CTC 433.
Thulasiammal and 7 others Vs. Kalyani and 5 others reported in 2003 (1) CTC 609.
Kotteeswaran (died) and others Vs. K.S.Subramaniam and others reported in (2008) 6 MLJ 626.
Sajathi Bi Vs. Fathima Bi and others reported in (2002) 2 MLJ 698.
In Govindaraj Vs. Ramadoss reported in 2011 (3) CTC 433.
Surendra Krishna Roy v. Mirza Mahammad Syed Ali Mutawali: AIR 1936 PC 15.
Vidhyadhar vs. Mankikrao reported in AIR 1999 SC 1441.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.