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

2022 Supreme(Mad) 2814

C. V. KARTHIKEYAN
Pattammal – Appellant
Versus
Natesan – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioners:D. Shivakumaran, Advocate. For the Respondents:R1 & R2, J. Hariharan, V. Nicholas, Advocates.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Review Application filed under Order 47 Rule 14 r/w Section 114 CPC seeking to review the judgment dated 04.02.2019 in S.A.No. 1814 of 1997 on the file of this Court.)

1. Heard Mr. D.Shivakumaran, learned counsel for the review applicants.

2. The Review Application has been filed by the 5th to 9th respondents, who are the legal representatives of the 4th respondent, seeking revisitation of the Judgment of this Court dated 04.02.2019 in S.A.No. 1814 of 1997.

3. It must be mentioned that the appellants in S.A.No. 1814 of 1997 were the plaintiffs in O.S.No. 678 of 1981. They had instituted the suit in the District Munsif Court, Krishnagiri, for partition and separate possession.

4. By Judgment dated 26.09.1991, the District Munsif, Krishnagiri, had dismissed the suit.

5. Challenging that Judgment, the plaintiffs had filed A.S.No. 49 of 1994 before the learned Additional Special Judge, Krishnagiri. By Judgment dated 27.07.1995, the learned Additional Special Judge, Krishnagiri, had dismissed the Appeal Suit. Questioning such dismissal, the plaintiffs had then filed S.A.No. 1814 of 1997.

6. Two substantial questions of law had been framed at the time of admission of the Secon

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