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

2016 Supreme(Mad) 1934

D.KRISHNAKUMAR
K. Krishnan – Appellant
Versus
A. Valarmathi – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : R. Siddarth, T.R. Rajaraman
For the Respondent: N. Manokaran

JUDGMENT :

D. Krishnakumar, J.

1. This Civil Revision Petition arises against the fair and decretal Order dated 15.9.2011, made in I.A. No. 432 of 2011 in O.S. No. 195 of 2010, on the file of the Principal Sub-Court, Salem. The Petitioner herein filed O.S. No. 195 of 2010, on the file of the Principal Sub-Court, Salem. The Revision Petitioner entered into a registered Sale Agreement dated 2.7.2008, with the Defendant in respect of the Suit property for a Sale Consideration of Rs.8,00,000.

2. A Written Statement was filed by the Defendant/the Respondent herein, denying the allegations of the Plaintiff.

3. The case was posted for cross-examination of PW1. At that stage, the Petitioner came to know that the possession of the Agreement Property has not been asked for and by inadvertence, the expression "without interest" had been added in Column (iii) of the prayer. In order to avoid this complication, the present Amendment Application is filed by the Plaintiff/Revisioner Petitioner in I.A. No. 432 of 2011 before the Trial Court.

4. A Counter Affidavit was filed by the Respondent herein denying the allegations found in the Affidavit filed in support of the Interlocutory Application. By an O

























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