Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B. Balaji, J
Vela Ramamurthy – Appellant
Versus
M.Rathnakumar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts regarding the filing of suit and grounds for revision. (Para 1 , 4) |
| 2. arguments presented regarding limitation and plaint rejection. (Para 2 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. observations on the standards for rejecting a plaint. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. conclusive ruling and outcomes of the case. (Para 10) |
ORDER
The revision is at the instance of the defendant, who was unsuccessful in the application in I.A.No.9 of 2023 in O.S.No.3962 of 2029 being rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.
2. Heard Mr.S.Santhosh Kumar, learned counsel for the revision petitioner/defendant, whose arguments are adopted and supported by Mr.T.V.Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the third respondent and Mr.T.V.Raghavachari, learned Senior Counsel for Ms.V.Srimathi, learned counsel for the contesting first respondent/plaintiff.
3. The suit has been filed before this Court originally in C.S.No.468 of
2016 for the following reliefs:
“ a) To grant damages to the tune of Rs.30,00,000.00 from defendants 1 to 5 jointly and severally.
b) Grant an order of permanent injunction restraining the defendants 1 to 5, their men, agents, servants and subordinates from exploiting the story of the plaintiff titled “Kuttraparambarai” and regi
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
