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

2018 Supreme(Mad) 3425

S.S.SUNDAR
S. Muthu Narayanan – Appellant
Versus
Paulraj Naicker – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
D. Nallathambi, R.J. Karthik, R. Subramanian.

JUDGMENT

1. The defendants 4 to 8, in the suit in O.S. No. 110 of 2000 on the file of the Sub-Court, Sankarankovil, are the petitioners in this Civil Revision Petition.

2. This petition has been filed as against the order dismissing the petition filed by the revision petitioners in E.A. No. 126 of 2012 in E.P. No. 40 of 2006 in O.S. No. 110 of 2000 under Section 47 CPC.

3. The brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of this Civil Revision Petition are as follows:

3.1. The respondent herein, as plaintiff, filed the suit in O.S. No. 110 of 2000 before the Sub-Court, Sankarankovil, for specific performance of an agreement of sale deed, dated 08.05.1993 and for other consequential reliefs. The mother of the petitioners is the second defendant in the suit. The suit was decreed ex-parte on 11.11.2002. The revision petitioners herein have earlier filed a petition to set aside the ex-parte decree along with the petition to condone the delay of 1892 days in filing the petition to set aside the ex-parte order dated 11.11.2002. The petition to condone the delay in I.A. No. 185 2008 in O.S. No. 110 of 2000 was dismissed by the Sub-Court, Sankarankovil. As against the same, the revision pet









































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