MAHANTH SATYANAND @ RAMJEE SINGH vs SHYAM LAL CHAUHAN AND ORS. — C.A. No. 6318/2010
Case under Section XVI. Status: Disposed.
CNR: SCIN010100742009
Filing Date
04-Apr-2009
Registration No
C.A. No. 6318/2010
Diary Number
10074/2009
Order Date
08-Feb-2018
Document Type
Judgement - of Main Case
Neutral Citation
2018 INSC 117
Disposal Type
Disposed Off
Last updated 03-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.MAHANTH SATYANAND @ RAMJEE SINGH
Adv. T. MAHIPAL
Respondent(s)
-
1.SHYAM LAL CHAUHAN AND ORS.
Adv. JITENDRA KUMAR ATISHI DIPANKAR
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
08-Feb-2018
Judgement - of Main CaseView PDF
-
08-Feb-2018
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
08-Feb-2018
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana and Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. Abdul Nazeer
-
31-Jan-2018
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
31-Jan-2018
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana and Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. Abdul Nazeer
-
24-Jan-2018
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
24-Jan-2018
Fixed Date by Court
Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.A. Bobde and Hon'ble Mr. Justice L. Nageswara Rao
-
23-Jan-2018
Fixed Date by Court
Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.A. Bobde and Hon'ble Mr. Justice L. Nageswara Rao
-
08-Jan-2018
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
08-Jan-2018
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
20-Feb-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
31-Jan-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
18-Oct-2012
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
30-Jul-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
05-Apr-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
22-Mar-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
15-Jan-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
07-Jan-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
04-Jan-2010
ROPView PDF
-
11-Dec-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
18-Nov-2009
ROPView PDF
-
10-Nov-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
01-May-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
04-Apr-2009
Case filed
Registration No. C.A. No. 6318/2010
-
[ 2018 INSC 117 ]
Judgement - of Main CaseView PDF
Case Summary: C.A. No. 006318/2010 The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order allowing both rival claimants (Mahanth Satyanand and Swami Triyoganand) to participate in a pending second appeal as legal representatives of a deceased defendant. The Court held that when rival claimants dispute who is the legal representative under Order 22 Rule 5 CPC, the court must first determine this question definitively before proceeding, not permit both parties to argue simultaneously. The matter was remitted to the High Court to decide on merits which claimant qualifies as the deceased's legal representative. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts