Thanjammal v. Siva
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner sought a stay on part of a decree. The High Court dismissed the petition, ruling it was misconceived because no further proceedings against the respondents were possible under the altered decree following the appellate court's decision.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction )
Friday, the Fourth day of December Two Thousand Twenty
PRESENT
The Hon`ble Mr Justice R.SUBRAMANIAN
CMP No.1117 of 2018
IN SA.56 of 2018
THANJAMMAL [ PETITIONER ]
vs
1 SIVA [ RESPONDENTS ]
2 MURUGESAN
Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to Stay the operation of the Judgement and clause 2 of the decree alone in AS.No.10 of 2016 Dt 21/09/2017 on the file of Sub Court Uthangarai (in CMP.No.1117/2018) pending disposal of the above SA.No.56/2018.
Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.A.SIVAJI, Advocate for the petitioner and of MR.V.NICHOLAS Advocate on behalf of the Respondents the court made the following order:-
This petition for stay is wholly misconceived. A suit for declaration and injunction was decreed by the Trial Court as prayed for. On Appeal the Appellate Court affirmed the decree for injunction while setting aside the decree for declaration. In such circumstances, there is no question of any further proceedings pursuant to the said decree at the instance of the respondents. Hence the application for stay is dismissed.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should grant a stay on the operation of a part of a decree while an appeal is pending.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
THANJAMMAL
- respondent
1 SIVA
- respondent
2 MURUGESAN
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court