Home   |   About us   |   Contact us   |   Request Callback  
 
   
ALREADY A MEMBER ?
Username
Password

Translate

This Page To:

 
PAPPATHI V/S SELLAMMAL (DIED) & OTHERS , decided on Wednesday, March 25, 2009.
[ In the High Court of Madras, C.R.P. (NPD) No687 of 2009 and M.P.No.1 of 2009 . ] 25/03/2009
Judge(s) : A.C. ARUMUGAPERUMAL ADITYAN
Advocate(s) : T. Dhanyakumar.
Judgment Full Text : Existing LawyerServices Members, kindly login above.

Non Members, Enter your email address:- and , to request this judgment.

Alternatively, you may send a request by email to info@lawyerservices.in for the Full Text of this Judgment (chargeable).

LawyerServices Facebook Page







#LawyerServices #bestlegalsoftware #legalsoftware #judgment #caselaw









    Criminal Procedure Code - Section 115 -     (Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of CPC against the order dated 6.2.2009 made in R.E.A.No.5 of 2008 in R.E.A.No.15 of 2008 in R.E.A.No.13 of 2008 in R.E.P.No.161 of 2004 in L.A.O.P.No.40 of 2002 on the file of the Principal District Judge Namakkal.)Heard the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner. 2. According to the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner the revision petitioner had filed R.E.A.No.5 of 2008 in R.E.A.No.15 of 2008 in R.E.A.No.13 of 2008 in R.E.P.No.161 of 2004 in L.A.O.P.No.40 of 2002 on the file of the Principal District Judge Namakkal under Rule 74 and Section 151 CPC to send for original Will filed in I.A.No.120 of 2008 in O.S.No.75 of 2006 which is according to the learned counsel for the revision petitioner pending in Fast Track Court Namakkal. The learned Principal District Judge after giving due deliberations to the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides and after going through the averments in the application as well as in the counter had dismissed the said application which necessitated the petitioner to come forward with this revision before this Court. 3. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case I am of the view that if O.S.No.75 of 2006 along with the connected Interlocutory applications are transferred to the Principal District Court Namakkal then it will not be difficult for the petitioner to mark the required documents which he had filed in I.A.No.120 of 2008 in O.S.No.75 of 2006 after filing necessary applications afresh.4. In fine O.S.No.75 of 2006 along with connected I.A.s are ordered to be withdrawn from the file of Fast Track Court Namakkal and to be transferred to the file of Principal District Judge Namakkal for trial along with R.E.A.No.5 of 2008 in R.E.A.No.15 of 2008 in R.E.A.No.13 of 2008 in R.E.P.No.161 of 2004 in L.A.O.P.No.40 of 2002. On such transfer it is open to the revision petitioner to file necessary application for required documents in O.S.No.75 of 2006 to be marked in R.E.A.No.5 of 2006 in R.E.A.No.15 of 2008 in R.E.A.No.13 of 2008 in R.E.P.No.161 of 2004 in L.A.O.P.No.40 of 20002. With the above observations this revision petition is ordered to be admitted and disposed of. Consequently connected M.P.No.1 of 2009 is closed.