1.SARAJAMMAL v. Kasilinga Padayachi
Case brief
What is this about?
Batch of condonation petitions dismissed as infructuous bringing legal representatives on record, having already been exempted in prior orders.
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.17339 of 2019 etc batch
C.M.P.Nos.17339, 17341, 17342, 17360, 17365, 17366, 17330, 17327, 17331, 17370, 17371, 17372, 17343, 17344, 17345, 17402, 17409, 17410, 17417, 17420, 17421, 17332, 17335, 17338, 17356, 17358, 17362, 17323, 17326, 17328, 17463, 17466 and 17467 of 2019 in S.A.Nos.1591, 1592, 1593, 1594 and 1595 of 1999
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
These Civil Miscellaneous Petitions have been filed to condone the delay, to set aside the abatement and to bring the Legal Representatives on record in all the appeals.
Miscellaneous Petitions are dismissed as infructuous. No costs.
26.04.2023 (2/3)
arb
Page No 1 of 2
C.M.P.Nos.17339 of 2019 etc batch
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
arb
C.M.P.Nos.17339 of 2019 etc batch in S.A.Nos.1591, 1592, 1593, 1594 and 1595 of 1999
26.04.2023 (2/3)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ___________ Page No 2 of 2_
V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court