REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

G. Selvam And Ors. Appellant

V/S

Kasthuri And Ors. Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

SWARAN LATA GHOSH V. H.K. BANERJEE AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
SETH CHAND RATAN V. PANDIT DURGA PRASAD [REFERRED TO]
M/S. MEDITRONICS CORPORATION OF INDIA & ORS. V. DR. MRS. SALIMA A. RAIS [REFERRED TO]
SWARAN LATA GHOSH VS. H K BANERJEE [REFERRED TO]
MANECK GUSTEDJI BURJARJI VS. SARAFAZALI NAWABALI MIRZA [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMMAD YUNUS VS. MOHAMMAD MUSTAQIM [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF TAMIL NADU R NAMBURAJAN VS. S THANGAVEL:STATE OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL INSURANCE CORPORATION LIMITED CHANDIGARH VS. NICOLLETTA ROHTAGI [REFERRED TO]
SADHANA LODH VS. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
SADHANA LODH VS. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH CHAND ARDAWATIYA VS. ANIL PANJWANI [REFERRED TO]
SURYA DEV RAI VS. RAM CHANDER RAI [REFERRED TO]
RAM CHANDRA SINGH VS. SAVITRI DEVI [REFERRED TO]
STATE BANK OF INDIA VS. ALLIED CHEMICAL LABORATORIES [REFERRED TO]
AJAY BANSAL VS. ANUP MEHTA [REFERRED TO]
PERUMAN BHAGVATHY DEVASWOM PERINADU VS. BHARGAVI AMMA [REFERRED TO]
C N RAMAPPA GOWDA VS. C C CHANDREGOWDA DEAD BY LRS [REFERRED TO]
AJIT KUMAR CHAKRAVARTY VS. SARBA MANGALA DEVI [REFERRED TO]
N. MAHESWARI VS. MARIAPPAN [REFERRED TO]
THOMSON PRESS (INDIA) LTD VS. NANAK BUILDERS & INVESTORS P.LTD [REFERRED TO]
SHANTILAL GULABCHAND MUTHA VS. TATA ENGINEERING & LOCOMOTIVE CO. LTD [REFERRED TO]
CHITRAKALA VS. P.MAHESH [REFERRED TO]
SHIVSHANKAR GURGAR VS. DILIP [REFERRED TO]
MUTHAMILSELVAN VS. A. MANICKAM [REFERRED TO]
V.L. DHANDAPANI VS. REVATHY RAMACHANDRAN [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the preliminary decree passed in O.S.No.752 of 1989 on the file of District Munsif Court, Poonamallee, the legal representatives of the deceased 18th defendant have filed the above Civil Revision Petition. The respondents 1 and 2 are the legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff Balaraman. The 1st respondent Kasthuri died pending the above Civil Revision Petition and her legal representatives were brought on record as respondents 3 to 10.

(2.) The plaintiff filed the suit in in O.S.No.752 of 1989 on the file of District Munsif Court, Poonamallee, to pass a preliminary decree and to allot 1/9th share to him and for separate possession. The defendants were made ex-parte in the suit. The Trial Court passed an ex parte preliminary decree on 28.01.1998 allotting 1/9th share to the plaintiff. The said suit was filed as against 24 defendants and all the defendants were set ex parte and a preliminary decree was passed. Pursuant to the preliminary decree passed in O.S.No.752 of 1989, the plaintiff filed a final decree application in I.A.No.742 of 1999. During the pendency of the final decree application, the sole plaintiff died on 28.01.2007. The respondents 10 to 31 in the final decree application remained ex-parte and without impleading the legal representatives of the deceased sole plaintiff, the Trial Court passed the final decree on 25.04.2007. Further, in the final decree application, the Trial Court had not mentioned about the respondents 5 to 15 and the service of notice to the respondents was not completed.

(3.) Aggrieved over the passing of final decree in I.A.No.742 of 1999, the legal representatives of the deceased 18th defendant preferred appeal in A.S.No.13 of 2009 on the file of Sub Court, Poonamallee and the Lower Appellate Court dismissed the appeal finding that the death of the sole plaintiff will not abate the proceedings.

Click here to view full judgment.

G. SELVAM AND ORS. Vs. KASTHURI AND ORS.

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address