Judgment of the Supreme Court at 4824/2551 (2008)Dr. p. 1359 1358, section, Township, 1745 1727.P. Wilkins Wed, section 148 One of the heirs sue the manager regarding the handling of legacy heritage considered to be heirs to sue instead of others. 1. the plaintiff has ever sued, Manager, heritage, and transferred to the estate. Ask them to withdraw as Manager of heritage and to revoke the transfer of the estate. By a trustee, and transferred the estate battle that dispute is the recipient of a dwelling, the estate and the lack of a statute, heritage. Court dispute that diagnosis is the estate. And the plaintiff brought a lawsuit/litigation that is 1 more than 1 year, but knows the death of owner heritage. The lawsuit, so the lack of heritage. Judge dismiss Judgment. That all three plaintiffs brought the lawsuit lawsuit defendant which is transferred to the estate is this case. Asked to enter the name of the plaintiff registered ownership over all three included in the estate thereof. Despite claims that a change of the text is to sue the estate the same list, called the lawsuit before celebrities. When the defendant, the defendant's struggle that is in dispute and the lack of heritage. Issues which require diagnosis in this case with the prosecution before relying on the same. Although the plaintiffs at 2 and 3, is neither a party in the lawsuit, but that the plaintiff is one 1 Sue managers transferred to heirs and inheritance the estate about the management of heritage that is not correct, then considered a plaintiff to sue instead of 2 and 3, which is the successor to other people, so this beauty in this case with a party in the lawsuit before a pair of the same. Demolition of the singer sued again by virtue of the same plaintiff sued all three, so it is the first prosecution forfeiture p. Wilkins Wed, section 148.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
