K.Premsekar v. S.Duraisamy
Case brief
What is this about?
High Court dismissed Civil Revision Petitions challenging the dismissal of applications for Advocate Commissioner appointment and impleadment. Court held post-constitution matters cannot be raised in appeal.
What did the court decide?
Civil Revision Petitions dismissed; connected miscellaneous petition closed. No costs.
What the court decided
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 15.12.2015
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE THIRU JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
C.R.P.(NPD)Nos.4459 & 4460 of 2014 &
M.P.No.1 of 2014 in
C.R.P.(NPD)No.4459 of 2014
K.Premsekar ... Petitioner in both CRPs
v.
S.Duraisamy ... Respondent in both CRPs
Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India to set aside the order and decreetal order dated 16.12.2013 in C.M.P.Nos. 884 and 885 of 2013 in A.S.No.169 of 2012 passed by the learned III Additional Judge,City Civil Court, Chennai.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order dismissing an application for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner in a suit for permanent injunction is correct.
Whether third parties aggrieved by the defendant's act can be impleaded in an appeal at the instance of the plaintiff.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
K.Premsekar
- respondent
S.Duraisamy
Coram
M. DURAISWAMY
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court