Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (1.86 seconds)
Documents citing P.S.K. Kanagaraj And Ors. vs Kamaraj And Anr. on 30 April, 1997

K.V.Ponnusamy vs Marakutty

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that during the pendency of the suit filed by Marichamy, he settled the property in favour of his wife under the settlement deed dated 09.06.2016 bearing document No.4595/2016. The settlee Amsaveni was a party to the suit and after service of summons, she suppressed the fact and in turn further, settled the suit property in favour of her brother/the present respondent/plaintiff. Suppressing all the facts, the respondent/plaintiff had filed the subject matter of suit in O.S.No.625 of 2018, which is liable to be strike off. The learned counsel relied on the judgment of this Court in the case of P.S.K.Kanagaraj and 3 others Vs. Kamaraj and another reported in [1997-3-L.W.909]. Once the plaintiff has suppressed the fact and not disclosed the entire fact, the powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India have to be invoked.
Madras High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - P Velmurugan - Full Document

United India Insurance Co. Ltd vs C.Sekar on 20 August, 2010

18.At this juncture, it is relevant to rely upon paragraph 19 of the judgment of this Hon'ble Court reported in 1997 II MLJ 655 in the case of P.S.K.Kanagaraj and others Vs. Kamaraj and another which reads as follows: "19. In view of the binding precedents, when a fraud is manifested and abuse of process of court is also brought to the notice of the court and when the plaintiff has obtained unfair advantage at the cost of others, naturally, it is the duty of the court to see that the miscarriage of justice does not survive further. The Plaintiff is only a namelender, who should not take advantage by the fraud and abuse of process of court committed by him."
Madras High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - B Rajendran - Full Document
1