Girish reported in
(2016) 14 SCC 142, has held as under:
7 In K.K. Velusamy (2011) 11 SCC
275 : (2011) 3 SCC
reserved for pronouncement of judgment, and
1
(2012)2 SCC 196
2
(2011)11 SCC 275
5
therefore, the learned Trial Court Judge could have ... when arguments are heard and judgment is
3
(2011)11 SCC 275
7
reserved. If there is abuse of the process of the court
subsequent decision, namely, K.K. Velusamy v. N. Palanisamy , (2011)
11 SCC 275 : (2011 AIR SCW 2296), submitted that with the aid of
Section ... there is no need to interfere with
the same.
xxx xxx xxx
11. The perusal of the materials placed by the plaintiff which are
intended
para 7 to 11
held as under:
13
"7. In K.K. Velusamy ((2011) 11 SCC 275), while
dealing with the power
under:
9
(2013) 11 SCC 296
10
(2011) 11 SCC 275
- 22 -
WA No. 1867 of 2024
"12. ...(a) Section
invoked [ K.K. Veluswamy
Vs. N Palanisamy , reported in (2011) 11 SCC 275].
34. In instant case, it is seen that beneficiary of sale
deed
terms as the court may deem fit to
impose.
2
(2011) 11 SCC 275
- 21 -
RP No. 747 of 2022
7.6. By relying
case of K.K. Velusamy
Vs. N. Palaaniswamy reported in (2011) 11 SCC 275
dealing with identical situation at paragraph
Velusamy vs. N.Palanisamy reported
15
in (2011)11 SCC 275, wherein, at paragraphs 11, 12, 14
and 15, it is held as under:
11
case of K.K.VELUSAMY v. N.PALANISAMY reported in
(2011)11 SCC 275, wherein it is held that in appropriate
cases, the Court