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

2018 Supreme(Mad) 3976

M.V.MURALIDARAN
Sambantham – Appellant
Versus
Naga Subramaniam – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners:D. Senthil, Advocate.
For the Respondents:V. Chandrasekar, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

1. This revision is directed against the order of the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Kumbakonam dated 03.11.2017 passed in I.A.No.58 of 2017 in O.S.No.60 of 2015, dismissing the petition filed by the petitioners under Section 10 of C.P.C.

2. The petitioners are defendants 1 and 4 in the suit. The respondents 1 and 2 are plaintiffs and the respondents 3 and 4 are defendants 2 and 3 in the suit.

3. The respondents 1 and 2 have filed the suit for declaration to declare that they are the absolute owners of the suit property and for recovery of possession. Resisting the suit, the petitioners have filed written statement.

4. Pending suit, the petitioners have filed I.A.No.58 of 2017 under Section 10 of CPC seeking to stay the suit in O.S.No.60 of 2015 till the disposal of the Second Appeal in S.A.(MD) No.668 of 2005 pending on the file of this Court.

5. According to petitioners, earlier, the 1st respondent had filed a suit for permanent injunction against the father-in-law of the 2nd petitioner and the 1st petitioner in O.S.No.16 of 2003 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Kumbakonam, as if the 1st petitioner and his elder brother were interfer





















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