MURUGESAN AND COMPANY Vs. VIJAYALAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) COMMON ORDER: Both the above civil miscellaneous appeals and the civil revision petition are directed against the fair and decretal orders both dated 12.4.2000, while the C.M.A. No.1056 of 2000 and C.M.A. No.191 of 2001 are preferred against the fair and decretal order made in E.A. No.324 of 1998, the C.R.P. No.2589 of 2001 is filed against the fair and decretal order made in E.A. No.39 of 1999, in one and the same E.P. No.82 of 1997 in O.S. No.175 of 1988 by the Court of Principal Subordinate Judge, Dindigul.

(2.) FOR the sake of easy reference and convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred to as they are arrayed in C.M.A. No.1056 of 2000.

(3.) CITING the above judgment, the learned counsel would exhort that the above judgment upholds the case of the decree-holder that no opportunity need be given repeatedly which is unwarranted.