Ramuammal v. Pavunu @ Pavunambal

C.M.P.Nos.15977, 15979 & 15980 of 2021 in S.A.No.538 of 2005 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.

The 5th appellant in the second appeal had died necessitating filing of these applications to condone the delay to set aside the abatement and to set aside the abatement and to bring on record the legal representatives as appellants 10 & 11.

2.Heard the learned counsel for the respondents also. 3.In the affidavit filed in support of these applications, it had been stated that the death of the 5th appellant was not immediately informed and it was only later informed by the counsel appearing before the trial Court. In view of such circumstances, there had been delay. It is stated that the delay is neither willful nor wanton. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.

sms 4.It is seen that the appeal had been admitted. The substantial questions of law have been framed. Therefore, a duty is cast on the Court to answer the substantial questions of law. These applications are allowed.

sms 14.07.2022 C.M.P.Nos.15977, 15979 & 15980 of 2021 in S.A.No.538 of 2005 (1⁄2) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis