Ramar v. Manickam
Case brief
What is this about?
Appeal against an order remanding a partition suit to the trial court. The High Court set aside the remand order, directing the lower appellate court to decide the appeal on merits considering available evidence.
What did the court decide?
Lower appellate court ordered to decide the appeal on merits within three months.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27.02.2018
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ
C.M.A.No.3576 of 2013 and MP.No.1 of 2013
Ramar
Vs.
Manickam ...Respondent/Defendant
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the decree and judgment dated 22.10.2013 made in A.S.No.22 of 2012 on the file of the Subordinate Judge Court at Sangagiri, remanding back O.S.No.91 of 2004 to the District Munsif Court, Sangagiri for fresh disposal.
For appellant : Mr.A.Murugan For Respondents : Mr.N.Manokaran for R1 J U D G M E N T
The plaintiff/appellant filed a suit for partition and separate possession in O.S.No.91 of 2004 . The trial court has framed appropriate issues and also passed a preliminary decree in favour of the plaintiff/appellant.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the lower appellate court's order remanding the matter for partial partition issue is sustainable.
Whether the trial court decided the issue of maintainability for partial partition despite it not being specifically framed.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Ramar
- respondent
Manickam
Coram
Mr. Justice M. Govindaraj
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court