G.D.PUSHPAVATHY Vs. MADHAVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Fraud and justice never dwell together (fraus et jus nunquam cohabitant); or fraud and deceit ought to benefit none (fraus et dolus nemini patrocinari debent) invoking these maxims, the petitioner seeks reopening of the preliminary decree passed about two decades back.

(2.) The dispute is between the legal heirs of Andalammal, namely, Madhavi (P -1), Elangovan (P -2) and Damodharan (P -3) and legal heirs of Durairajan, namely, Pushapavathi (wife) (D -1), Kothainayagi (D -2), Mythili (D -3), Durairajan and Andalammal being the son and daughter of their parents, Govinda Naicker and Nagammal. Govinda Naicker was the son of Ponnappa Naicker and Ponnappa Naicker was the son of Narayana Naicker, from whom the title originates.

(3.) This is the second round of litigation initiated by Mythili, D -3 in O.S.No.3053 of 1993 and also the plaintiff in O.S.No.5067 of 2014. Mythili filed the suit in O.S.No.5067 of 2014, seeking for a declaration that the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.3050 of 1993 before VII Assistant City Civil Court, dated 16.07.2002, is null and void and not binding on her.