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

2016 Supreme(Mad) 4025

D.KRISHNAKUMAR
Ravichandran – Appellant
Versus
Sundara Kumar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. R.J. Karthick, Advocate

ORDER :

D. Krishnakumar, J.

The civil revision petition arises against the order dated 08.01.2016 passed in I.A.No.92 of 2015 in O.S.No.61 of 2013 on the file of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Thoothukudi.

2. According to the petitioner, the respondents filed a suit in O.S.No.61 of 2013 before the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Thoothukudi for the relief of partition on the basis of a Will dated 07.12.1976. In the above said suit, the petitioner paid witness batta to the 1st plaintiff to examine his as defendant's side witness. But, the trial Court on 12.11.2014 refused to permit the petitioner to summon the 1st plaintiff. Aggrieved against the said order, the petitioner filed C.R.P.(MD) No.265 of 2015 before this Court. This Court, on 16.02.2015m dismissed the said civil revision petition on the ground that alternative remedy is available. Hence, the petitioner filed I.A.No.92 of 2015 under Order 16, Rule 21 of C.P.C., to issue summons of supina for examination of the 1st respondent/1st plaintiff. According to the petitioner, the first plaintiff is not the contesting plaintiff in the suit. However, the respondents objected the said application. The p























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