G.Sundarambal v. D.Suresh
Case brief
What is this about?
High Court set aside a Sub-Judge's non-speaking order impleading the 1st respondent in a partition suit, directing it to be passed de novo after hearing all parties.
What did the court decide?
Impugned order impleading 1st respondent set aside; Sub-Judge directed to pass appropriate orders on merits after hearing parties within two months.
What the court decided
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.04.2016
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. KRISHNAKUMAR
CRP (PD)No.3402 of 2010
and
M.P. No.1 of 2010
G.Sundarambal .. Petitioner
Vs
1.D.Suresh 2.D.Parvatham 3.Duraisamy 4.V.S.Gothandaramasamy 5.Sasikumar .. Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 10.08.2010 made in I.A.No.705 of of 2010 in O.S.No.19 of 2005 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Court, Erode.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a non-speaking order impleading a party as defendant can be sustained?
Whether an order impleading a party without providing opportunity of hearing is liable to be set aside?
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
G.Sundarambal
- respondent
D.Suresh
- respondent
D.Parvatham
- respondent
Duraisamy
- respondent
V.S.Gothandaramasamy
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court