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

2023 Supreme(Mad) 3216

P. B. BALAJI
Ganapathy – Appellant
Versus
Papanasams – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:T.S. Mohamed Mohideen, Advocate. For the Respondents:K. Hemakarthikeyan, Advocate, R2, No appearance.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decretal order passed in I.A.No.41 of 2015, in O.S.No.500 of 2011, dated 23.02.2017, on the file of the District Munsif, Tenkasi.)

1. The plaintiff, in O.S.No.500 of 2011, is the revision petitioner. Pending the suit, an application in I.A.No.41 of 2015 was taken out by the second defendant, seeking permission to file a counter claim under Order VIII Rule 6-A C.P.C. The said application came to be allowed, as against which, the plaintiff is before this Court.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the learned counsel for the contesting respondent.

3. It is the case of the plaintiff that the suit has been filed for declaration in respect of 300 sq.ft., pursuant to the purchase said to have been made by the plaintiff. The second defendant has filed his written statement initially stating that the plaintiff was entitled to only 300 sq.ft. of vacant land and that the plaintiff could not claim right over any additional area. Subsequently, the second defendant filed the said I.A.No.41 of 2015 to receive his counter claim.

4. The said applicati

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