Smt Nallamma Since Deceased By Her … vs Sri T Sathyananda on 6 January, 2009

: ,/ ‘ 3 .. ‘ ‘~- . . . . . .. ‘V

LAT’

W.P.Nc:a.1é58C1{i2U08

3. The gwrtitioncrf defendant has specificafiy denied that
p};;–1i11t:iff is not in p€)SS€:SSi0I1 of the suit schcdule prqfisiity in
£312′-81131166 of the aiicgeci agreement of sale.

circumstances, thttrfi was no impeéiiment fer the 23:; ‘

appiicaslon seeking permission 0f’*£1;)z1rt.V’tg»__ai33§V1is;i VLfi锑p’la’V’3’nt
deicting the 12:8: two senmncw of ‘Nof(;’e,o£’ thé There is
no flicgality in the iI[1pI1gflC(§ :§’I_’l.”i13’f¥,f飒tEf” piaintjjf to amend

thf: piaiut as pmycd f£iv’r;__ ‘l”h!:i*:e” in §:f1é’pt:titi011.

dismissed. V

Sd/-

Judge