Soudamini v. Gangadharan
Case brief
What is this about?
A civil revisioner challenged orders dismissing a property suit for default. The court quashed the impugned orders, directed restoration of the suit, and issued notices for hearing in view of no contest and no prejudice.
What did the court decide?
The impugned orders are set aside. The suit is to be restored. The court below shall note the death of third respondent and proceed with notice to other parties.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY 2017/27TH POUSHA, 1938
CRP.No. 254 of 2012 ()
CMA 35/2010 OF 1ST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, PALAKKAD. O.S.NO.396/2005 OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF COURT, PALAKKAD.
REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF:
SOUDAMINI, AGED 54 YEARS, W/O.BHARATHAN, POTTAKKAD HOUSE, ELAPPULLY VILLAGE, ERATTUKULAM POST, PALAKKAD TALUK-678622.
BY ADV. SRI.K.JAYASANKAR (KAPRASSERY)
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:
1. GANGADHARAN, S/O.LATE KITTA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, PUNJAPPADAM, VENGODI AMSOM, ELAPPULLY, PALAKKAD-678622.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned order refusing restoration of a suit dismissed for default is sustainable when parties did not contest and no prejudice is caused.
Whether the death of a respondent during the pendency of revision affects the disposition of pending proceedings.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
SOUNDAMINI
- respondent
GANGADHARAN
- respondent
SHANMUGHAN
- respondent
KUPPUSWAMY KOUNDER
- respondent
KESAVAN
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court