Allowed

Rajalakshmi Kasiviswanathan v. v.Lakshmi

Madras HC14 Feb 2017CMP(MD)/1331/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court considered a petition for condonation of delay in representing a second appeal. Despite 624 days of delay, the court allowed condonation onpayment of Rs. 1,500 to a charitable institution within one week, failing which the petition would be dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 624 days condoned on condition of paying Rs. 1,500 to the Rojavanam Homeless & Aged Care Centre within one week.

Rajalakshmi Kasiviswanathan Vs v.Lakshmi — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction )

¶2

Tuesday, the Fourteenth day of February Two Thousand Seventeen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DURAISWAMY

¶5

CMP(MD) No.1331 of 2017 IN SA(MD) No.SR16580 of 2015

¶6

1.RAJALAKSHMI KASIVISWANATHAN

¶7

3.HARIHARAN ... PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS

¶8

¶9

1.V.LAKSHMI

¶10

2.PADMA SURIYANARAYANAN

¶11

3.VALLI MANI

¶12

4.PARATHI VIJAYASANKAR

¶13

5.SARASWATHI GANESH

¶14

6.LAKSHMI ... RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

¶15

Prayer in CMP(MD) No.1331 of 2017:-

¶16

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to condone the delay of 624 days in representing the above SA(MD) SR16580 of 2015.

¶17

Prayer in SA(MD) No.SR16580 of 2015:-

¶18

Second Appeal against the judgment and Decree passed in A.S.No.1 of 2013 & Cross Appeal No.5 of 2014 on the file of the Principal District Court, Tanjore dated 24.09.2014 modifying the judgment and decree padded in O.S.No.275 of 2010 on the file of the Additional Sub Court, Tanjore dated 17.08.2012.

¶19

ORDER : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.M.P.SENTHIL, Advocate for the petitioner, the court made the following order:-

¶20

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶21

2.There is a delay of 624 days in representing the papers. In paragraph No.4 of the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the petitioners have satisfactorily explained the reasons for the delay. Though the petitioners have satisfactorily explained the reason for the delay, since the delay is on the higher side, I am of the view that in the interest of Justice, the same can be condoned https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ on payment of cost. Accordingly, the delay of 624 days in representing the papers is condoned on condition that the petitioner

¶22

paying a sum of Rs.1,500/- (Rupees one thousand and five hundred only) to the Rojavanam Homeless & Aged Care Centre, Melur Road, Uthangudi, Madurai within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the petition shall stand automatically dismissed without further reference to this Court.

¶23

3.Accordingly, the petition is ordered.

¶24

sd/14/02/2017 / TRUE COPY /

¶25

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO

¶26

1.THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE, THANJAVUR. 2.THE ADDITIONAL SUBORDINATE JUDGE, THANJAVUR. 3.THE OFFICER INCHARGE ROJAVANAM HOMELESS & AGED CARE CENTRE, MELUR ROAD, UTHANGUDI, MADURAI.

¶27

¶28

AE/BS/SAR3/15.02.2017/2P/4C

¶29

ORDER IN CMP(MD) No.1331 of 2017 IN SA(MD) No.SR16580 of 2015 Date :14/02/2017

¶30

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

Rajalakshmi Kasiviswanathan v. v.Lakshmi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajalakshmi Kasiviswanathan v. v.Lakshmi

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

Chandra D/O.Nanjundan Chettiar Vs Nagarajan

Vimala Pandian Vs Sekar

Nesyyan Vs Chenniyappan

Devendrametha, Vs R.Sakkaraiappan

Ramola Selva Radhika Vs Arunachala Nadar

Ramalakshmi Vs a.S.N.Shanmugham