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

2021 Supreme(Mad) 121

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
R. Shantha – Appellant
Versus
Ramasamy Gounder – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : D. Rajasekar.
For the Respondent: P. Veena Suresh.

JUDGMENT :

S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.

Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Order 43 Rule 1(u) of CPC, to set aside the judgment and decree dated 12.06.2017 in A.S. No. 25 of 2012 on the file of the District and Sessions Court, Thiruvannamalai reversing the judgment and decree dated 27.06.2012 in O.S. No. 211 of 1990 on the file of the Additional Sub Court, Tiruvannamalai.

1. The judgment and decree dated 12.06.2017 passed in A.S. No. 25 of 2012 is under challenge in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

2. The plaintiff is the appellant in the present appeal. The suit was instituted for specific performance and it was decreed in favour of the appellant. The defendants filed an appeal suit in A.S. No. 25 of 2012. The first Appellate Court remanded the matter back for re-trial mainly on the ground that the trial Court has not considered the documents as well as the evidence in the right perspective and therefore, the issues are to be reconsidered, if necessary by conducting re-examination.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant mainly contended that the reasons furnished for remanding of the matter is unacceptable in view of the fact that the remand is to be made only in the suits

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