Allowed

R.Sivakami, W/O.N.Kumarasamy v. M.Veerakannan

Madras HC11 Mar 2014CRP(MD)/501/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Revision petition filed by a landlord under Article 227 of the Constitution seeking expedited disposal of a pending rent control appeal. The court directed the authority to dispose the matter within a month.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Rent Control Appellate Authority / Principal Subordinate Judge, Nagercoil to dispose of the Rent Control Appeal in R.C.A.No.15 of 2013 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within

R.Sivakami, W/O.N.Kumarasamy Vs M.Veerakannan — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.03.2014 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.MATHIVANAN

¶4

C.R.P.(PD)(MD).No.501 of 2014

¶5

R.Sivakami

¶6

rep.by her power agent, K.Manikanda Kumar, Kannyakumari District

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

Vs. M.Veerakannan ... Respondent

¶9

Prayer : Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying for expeditious disposal of the case in R.C.A.No.15 of 2013, pending on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority/Principal Subordinate Court, Nagercoil within time frame, which may be fixed by this Court.

¶10

For Petitioner: Mr.M.Suri

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

Invoking the provision of Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the present revision has been filed by the petitioner, seeking a direction to the Rent Control Appellate Authority / the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Nagercoil to dispose the Rent Control Appeal in R.C.A.No.15 of 2013 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a time which may be fixed by this Court.

¶13

The revision petitioner herein is the landlord whereas the respondent is the tenant. It appears from the records that the Rent Control Appeal in R.C.A.No.15 of 2013 has to be disposed of expeditiously. It appears that the appeal has been preferred by the respondent herein as against the fair and decreetal order dated 21.08.2013 made in I.A.No.30 of 2013 in R.C.O.P.No.40 of 2006 on the file of the Rent Control Appellate Authority / the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Nagercoil. It is also revealed that the R.C.O.P.No.46 of 2006 was filed by the revision petitioner/landlord as early as on 22.09.2006 and the respondent/tenant had entered appearance on 25.10.2006. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, he took several adjournments for filing counter on the part of the respondent from 25.10.2006 to 15.06.2010 and thereafter, it appears that the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ transfer application was filed by the respondent on 15.03.2007 and it was dismissed by the District Court on 19.12.2008. Then, the

¶14

¶15

petition in R.C.O.P.No.46 of 2006 enquiry was commenced as early as on 22.01.2011 and the petitioner was cross-examined by the tenant on 28.02.2011. Thereafter, P.W.2 was also examined on 06.04.2011 and subsequently, the respondent side evidence also closed. Under such circumstances, the R.C.A.No.15 of 2013 filed by the petitioner has been unnecessarily adjourned periodically on extraneous ground without assigning any reason.

¶16

Heard Mr.M.Suri, learned counsel appearing for the

¶17

petitioner.

¶18

This petition has been filed by the petitioner/landlord seeking a direction as afore stated, this Court has carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the grounds of the revision, this Court finds better in the interest of justice, expedient to issue a direction as requested by the petitioner. Accordingly, the revision petition is allowed and the Rent Control Appellate Authority / the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Nagercoil is hereby directed to dispose of the Rent Control Appeal in R.C.A.No.15 of 2013 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a months time from the date of receipt of a copy of this order as the said appeal in R.C.A.No.15 of 2013 stands posted for advance of argument on behalf of the both sides. The result of the disposal shall have to be intimated to the office of the Registry. No order as to costs.

¶19

Sd/Assistant Registrar

¶20

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶21

¶22

The Rent Control Appellate Authority/ Principal Subordinate Judge, Nagercoil.

¶23

Copy to: The Section Officer, Judicial Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. [for watching report]

¶24

+1cc to Mr.M.Suri, Advocate in SR No.15041/14.

¶25

akv

¶26

msm 14.03.2014 p2/4c

¶27

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

R.Sivakami, W/O.N.Kumarasamy v. M.Veerakannan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Sivakami, W/O.N.Kumarasamy v. M.Veerakannan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santhanasami Pillai (Ded) Vs a.Arputharaj

S.Ramasmay Vs Sathappan (Died)

Mr.M.M.Afsarullah Vs the Inspector of Police

Karuppasamy Vs K.S. Eswaran

T.Sukumar Vs Indulakshmi

Uco Bank, Vs M.Thiruppathi