IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B.Balaji, J
NANDHINI – Appellant
Versus
PERUMALSAMY – Respondent
O R D E R
These revision as against the order in Interlocutory Application in I.A. No.1 of 2021 in O.S. No.108 of 2019 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Gobichettipalayam. The second defendant in the said suit is the revision petitioner.
2. I have heard Mr.S.R.Ragunathan, learned counsel for Mr.C.Prabakaran, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.V.Ramesh, learned Government Advocate for the second respondent. There is no appearance on the side of the respondents 1, 3 and 4.
3. The Interlocutory Application in I.A. No.01 of 2021 was taken out for rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure , 1908, contending that the plaint does not disclose a cause of action and also for being barred by principles of res judicata and adverse possession which was already adjudicated and had attained finality.
4. The learned counsel Mr.S.R.Ragunathan, appearing for the petitioner would submit that the issues that are raised in the present suit were already adjudicated upon and the same attained finality in First Appeal in A.S. No.29 of 1980 as against the dismissal of a suit in O.S. No.246 of 1976 . The said suit in O.S. No.246 of 1976 was instituted by
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.