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

2023 Supreme(Mad) 111

S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
M. Ramani – Appellant
Versus
D. K. Jayasudha – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr.G.Balamanikandan
For the Respondent: Mr.V.Lakshminarayanan

ORDER :

The Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the Fair and Decreetal order dated 20.07.2021 passed in I.A.No.3 of 2021 in O.S.No.34 of 2013.

2. The revision petitioners are the defendants and the respondent instituted a Suit for Specific Performance and Permanent Injunction.

3. The revision petitioners/defendants were set ex-parte and an order was passed in favour of the respondent/plaintiff on 26.02.2014. After a lapse of about seven (7) years, the revision petitioners/defendants filed Interlocutory Application in I.A.No.3 of 2021 to set aside the ex-parte order passed on 26.02.2014. The Trial Court dismissed the Interlocutory Application in I.A.No.3 of 2021. Challenging the said order, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed.

4. The learned counsel for the revision petitioners mainly contended that the revision petitioners/ defendants are not residing in the address stated in the Plaint and thus, they had no knowledge about the summons served on the revision petitioners/defendants in the Original Suit and thus, they could not be able to defend the Suit filed by the respondent/ plaintiff.

5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/plaintiff obj

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