Dismissed

N.Sathianathan and Sons(P)Ltd. v. Asa John Divianathan

Madras HC19 Sept 2016OSA/83/1994

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Madras disposed of Original Side Appeals filed against a decree. The Court held that decrees corrected by error on the original side are corrected by the original court, while challenges to the decree itself are matters for a separate appeal. Consequently, the original side appeals were dismissed with no costs awarded.

What did the court decide?

The Original Side Appeals were disposed of (dismissed) with no costs awarded.

N.Sathianathan and Sons(P)Ltd. Vs Asa John Divianathan — Company and Corporate | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 19.09.2016

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

The Hon'ble MR.SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶6

AND

¶7

The Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN

¶8

O.S.A. Nos.83 of 1994 and 200 of 1995

¶9

N.Sathianathan & Sons (P) Ltd. Rep. By its Managing Director, K.Manikyaraja Ballal, 'Hotel Palmgrove', Kodambakkam High Road, Madras 600 034.

¶10

.. Appellant in OSA 83/94 & Respondent in OSA 200/95

¶11

-vs-

¶12

1.Asa John Divianathan 2.Susanna Rani Sekar

¶13

3.Rajkumari David 4.N.Swaminathan (Deceased) 5.E.V.Swaminathan

¶14

6.Alfred Swaminathan

¶15

7.Sukumar Swaminathan

¶16

(RR5 to 7 brought on record as LRs. Of deceased R-1 (in OSA.80/1994) and R-4 (in OSA.81/1994) vide order of Court dt.23.6.2011 made in Memo dt.16.6.2011 in USSR No.3067/2011) .. Respondents in

¶17

OSA.83/1994 & appellants in OSA.200/1995

¶18

Appeals filed under Order XXXVI Rule 11 of O.S. Rules read with Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the common order and decretal order dated 09.02.1994 made in Application No.5170 of 1991 and 4135 of 1991 in C.S.No.600 of 1979 on the file of original side of this

¶19

¶20

Court.

¶21

For Appellant in OSA.83/94 & Respondent in OSA.200/95 : Mr.V.S.Subramanyan For Respondents in in OSA.83/94 & Appellants in OSA.200/95 : Mr.T.V.Ramanujam, Sr.C. For Mr.K.Kuppusamy

¶22

¶23

J U D G M E N T

¶24

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by The Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶25

There is no question of correction of the decree by the appellate Court, as the decree is corrected by the original Court if it is alleged that there is a mistake. If the decree is assailed in appeal, as has been done in the present case in a separate appeal, then that would be a matter to be considered in that appeal.

¶26

2.Original Side Appeals are, accordingly, disposed of. No costs.

¶27

(S.K.K., CJ.) (R.M.D., J.) 19.09.2016 Index : Yes/No Website : Yes/No

sra

The Sub Assistant Registrar Original Side, Madras High Court, Chennai.

¶32

¶33

The Hon'ble Chief Justice and R.Mahadevan, J.

¶34

(sra)

¶35

O.S.A.Nos.83 of 1994 and 200 of 1995

¶36

19.09.2016

N.Sathianathan and Sons(P)Ltd. v. Asa John Divianathan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Sathianathan and Sons(P)Ltd. v. Asa John Divianathan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Suresh, Res. at No.97/110, Vs The Principal Secretary

Syed Samlullah(Deceased) Vs Syed Sanuallah(Deceased)

K.Ashok Kumar, Vs The District Collector

N.Sathianatha and Sons(P)Ltd., Vs N.Swaminathan,(Deceased)

Mr.Murugeson, Vs M/S.Absa Bank Ltd, Singapore

M/S Shriram Transport Finance Vs M.Elangovan