Subadra v. B.Mohan
Case brief
What is this about?
Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 226 challenging orders dismissing applications for default were dismissed as the petitioner was absent when cases were called multiple times, validating the trial court's decision.
What did the court decide?
Civil Revision Petitions dismissed; liberty granted to file restoration petitions before the trial court.
What the court decided
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Reserved on : 14.12.2015
DATED: 05.01.2016
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHOCKALINGAM
C.R.P.(PD) Nos.1275 to 1277 of 2013 and
M.P.No.1 of 2013 in C.R.P.No.1275 of 2013
R.Subadra
... Petitioner in all C.R.Ps./Defendant
Vs.
K.B.Mohan ...Respondent in all C.R.Ps./Plaintiff
Prayer in C.R.P.No.1275/2013:- Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the order dated 26.02.2013 made in I.A.No.822 of 2012 in I.A.No.342 of 2012 in O.S.No.677 of 2010 on the file of the learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court No.I), Coimbatore.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the impugned orders dismissing applications for default were passed without application of mind or without giving sufficient opportunity.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
R.Subadra
- respondent
K.B.Mohan
Coram
G.CHOCKALINGAM
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court