Dismissed

Samuvel Rathinaraj v. Malker Nisha

Madras HC18 Mar 2013CRP(MD)/183/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court dismissed a civil revision petition seeking to set aside an arrest order in motor accident claim execution. The Court observed that an appeal challenging the original award was pending with an interim stay granted, rendering the revision infructuous as the petitioner must work remedies within that appeal.

What did the court decide?

The civil revision petition is dismissed as infructuous; connected miscellaneous petitions are also dismissed.

Samuvel Rathinaraj Vs Malker Nisha — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 18.03.2013

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.RAMANATHAN

¶6

C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.183 of 2013 &

¶7

M.P(MD)Nos. 2 & 3 of 2013

¶8

Samuvel Rathinaraj : Petitioner/ 2nd respondent/ 2nd respondent

¶9

-Vs-

¶10

1.Malker Nisha 2.Peermohideen 3.Minor Asik Abbas : Respondents 1 to 3/Petitioners 1 to 3/ Petitioners 1 to 3 4.Maharajan : Respondent-4/1st Respondent/ 1st Respondent

¶11

Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure to set aside the order passed in E.P.No.34 of 2012 in M.C.O.P.No.330/2011 dated 18.12.2012 on the file of the Additional District Court No.1, Thoothukudi.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Balamurugapandi

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

The second respondent in M.C.O.P.No.330 of 2011 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.1, Thoothukudi, is the revision petitioner. The respondents 1 to 3 filed the above claim petition claiming compensation and award was passed on 14.03.2012, directing the revision petitioner herein to pay the respondents 1 and 2 herein Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees Five Lakhs only) with interest at the rate of 7.5 % from the date of the petition. The respondents 1 to 3 filed E.P.No.34 of 2012 in M.C.O.P.No.330 of 2011 to execute the award passed in the claim petition by arresting the revision petitioner and that petition was allowed and aggrieved by the same, this revision is filed.

¶15

2.The learned Counsel for the petitioner that the Court below without appreciating that the respondents 1 to 3 have proved the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ means of the revision petitioner ordered arrest only on the basis of the oral evidence of PW.1 and the Court below has not satisfied about

¶16

¶17

the means of the revision petitioner while ordering the arrest and therefore the order of arrest is liable to be set aside. He further submitted that this Court while ordering notice in admission on 07.02.2013 passed an order of stay of the order of arrest on condition of depositing a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-to the credit of M.C.O.P.No.330 of 2011 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.1, Thoothukudi,within a period of four weeks and due to the death of the mother, the petitioner was not able to comply with the condition and sufficient time may be given to the petitioner to comply with the condition.

¶18

3.On enquiry, the revision petitioner, admitted that the revision petitioner filed an appeal in C.M.A.No.849 of 2012 before this Court challenging the award passed in M.C.O.P.No.330/2011 and also applied for stay in M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2013 and this Court granted interim stay on condition of depositing the entire award amount with the proportionate accrued interest and costs within a period of six weeks and the order passed in M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2012 is dated 28.08.2012. As the revision petitioner has preferred an appeal against the award and interim stay was also granted in that appeal on condition, the revision petitioner has to work his remedy only in the appeal. Further, having regard to the order of stay passed in C.M.A.no.849 of 2012, the revision has also become infructuous and the revision petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are also dismissed.

¶19

Sd/-

¶20

Assistant Registrar(AS)

¶21

/True Copy/

¶22

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶23

¶24

The Additional District Judge No.1, Thoothukudi.

¶25

C.R.P.(NPD)(MD).No.183 of 2013 18.03.2013

¶26

gsr NSV/1.4.13/2P/2C

¶27

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Samuvel Rathinaraj v. Malker Nisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samuvel Rathinaraj v. Malker Nisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Anandaraja,President, Vs the Supdt. of Police

A.Ghandeeban, Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

P. Pon Saravanan, Vs the Inspector of Police

Seethalakshmi Vs Logambal

Sheik Beer, Vs Sheik Mydeen

Dharmaraj Vs Sirungeri Nagar Welfare