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

2014 Supreme(Mad) 4569

K.RAVICHANDRABAABU
S. Nehru – Appellant
Versus
S. Sivasankar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :J. Sudhakaran, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Rajiv Gandhi, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

K. Ravichandrabaabu, J.

1. The Revision Petitioners are the Plaintiffs in O.S. No. 1956 of 2008 on the file of XI Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai. The Respondents are the Defendants in the said Suit. The Plaintiffs filed the said Suit for Permanent Injunction restraining the Defendants from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the First Plaintiff of the Suit Schedule property. On 6.7.2009, the Suit was decreed ex parte. After nearly three years, the Defendants filed I.A. No. 17954 of 2012 seeking to condone the delay on 842 days in filing an Application to set aside the said ex parte Decree. The said Application was allowed by the Trial Court on 12.8.2013. Challenging the same, the Plaintiffs filed C.R.P. (NPD) No. 3697 of 2013 before this Court. The said C.R.P. was dismissed by Order dated 9.10.2013, however by observing that it is open for the Revision Petitioners therein (Petitioners herein) to contest the Application filed to set aside the ex parte Decree and the lower Court shall independently decide the Application to set aside the ex parte Decree, without being influenced by any observations made in the order passed in the said C.R.P. Therea





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