High Court dismissed Civil Revision Petitions as infructuous because execution proceedings were terminated after possession of the property was delivered to the landlord, leaving nothing to survive in the revisions.
Both Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petition closed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 02.09.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.V.MURALIDARAN
C.R.P.(NPD)Nos.1017 and 1018 of 2011
Manimegalai
.. Petitioner in both CRPs
Vs
Saroja .. Respondent in both CRPs
Common Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, against the order dated 28.09.2010 made in I.A.Nos.190 and 191 of 2009 in R.C.O.P.No.24 of 2008 respectively, on the file of the Forum of the Rent Controller, Udhagamandalam.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Guruprasad (in both CRPs) For Respondent : Mr.V.Raghavachari (in both CRPs)
O R D E R
CRP(NPD).No.1017 of 2011 was filed against the dismissal order
of condone delay petition in I.A.No.190 of 2009 and another Civil Revision Petition (NPD) No.1018 of 2011 was filed for setting aside the exparte order in I.A.No.191 of 2009. During the course of arguments
in both the civil revision petitions, the respondent / landlord has
2
produced E.P. proceedings passed in E.P.No.58 of 2009, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Udhagamandalam, in which the learned counsel appearing for the landlord made an endorsement on 06.01.2011 that the possession was delivered and the Execution Petition was terminated. Recording the said submissions, the learned Judge / Rent Controller, Udhagamandalam, terminated the Execution Petition, since the possession of the property was handed over to the respondent / landlord. Therefore, nothing survives in both the Civil Revision Petitions.
2.Hence, both the Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
02.09.2016
vs
Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No
To
The Rent Controller, Udhagamandalam.
3
M.V.MURALIDARAN.J.,
vs
C.R.P.(NPD)Nos.1017 and 1018 of 2011
02.09.2016
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Manimegalai
Saroja
M.V.MURALIDARAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
