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

2018 Supreme(Mad) 1855

P.T.ASHA
Lagrave Jayaseeli – Appellant
Versus
Trinite Modestine (deceased) – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Chitra Sampath, Senior Counsel for P. Valliappan, Advocate.
For the Respondents:G. Masilamani, Senior Counsel for M/s. G.M. Mani Associates, Advocates.

JUDGMENT :

1. The above Civil Miscellaneous Petitions have been filed to condone the delay of 909 days, to set aside the abatement caused due to the death of the sole appellant, on 13.01.2010 and to bring on record the petitioners as the representatives in interest of the deceased sole appellant Lagrave Jayaseeli. The applications have been filed invoking the provisions of Order XXII Rule 10 C.P.C on the ground that they have purchased portions of the suit property pending the proceedings from the deceased sole appellant.

Contentions of the Petitioners:

2. In the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the petitioners would contend that it was only during the 1st week of October 2012, that they had come to know that the above Second Appeal had been dismissed as abated on 29.09.2011. They would also contend that it was only on account of the collusion between the respondents and the deceased appellant that the matter was allowed to be dismissed for default.

3. They would further contend that the deceased appellant had sold the entire suit property to more than hundred persons













































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