Petitioners sought inclusion of legal representatives of deceased respondent on record in an appeal. The Court found they were already represented and closed the petitions as unnecessary.
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.
C.M.P.Nos.1153, 1154 & 1155 of 2011 in
A.S.No.437 of 1999
S.S. SUNDAR, J. and A.A.NAKKIRAN, J.
[Order of the Court was made by S.S. SUNDAR, J. ]
The legal representatives of the deceased 1st respondent, namely Gurusamy, in A.S.No.437 of 1999, have filed these petitions to bring them on record as respondents in the above appeal.
2.However, this Court finds that the petitioners 4 to 8 herein have already been brought on record as legal representatives of the deceased 1st respondent in A.S.No.437 of 1999 as respondents 4 to 8, by an order of this Court dated 11.10.2011 made in C.M.P.No.236 of 2010 filed by the appellant. Therefore, these petitions are not necessary.
3.Accordingly, these petitions are closed.
mkn
Legal representatives of the deceased 1st respondent
S.S. SUNDAR
A.A. NAKKIRAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
