Disposed

Sri P.Easwaran v. Sri R.Annadurai

Madras HC16 Mar 2017CRP/1001/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court disposed of a civil revision petition filed against an order returning papers with a note on court fees and maintenance. The court granted liberty to the petitioner-plaintiff to make submissions to the Trial Court.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to the petitioner-plaintiff to make submissions to the Trial Court within one week regarding queries on the query note.

Sri P.Easwaran Vs Sri R.Annadurai — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 16.03.2017

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE THIRU JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY

¶6

C.R.P.(PD)No.1001 of 2017

¶7

Sri.P.Easwaran ... Petitioner

¶8

¶9

Sri.R.Annadurai 2. Sri.M.S.Subramaniam ... Respondents

¶10

Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the docket order dated 20.12.2016 made in O.S.C.F.R.No.5423 of 2016 on the file of the Hon'ble District Munsif Judge Court, at Tirupur and allow this revision petition.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Selvakumar

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

Challenging the docket order passed in O.S.C.F.R.No.5423 of 2016

¶14

on the file of District Munsif Court, Tirupur, the plaintiff has filed the

¶15

¶16

above Civil Revision Petition.

¶17

The plaintiff filed the unnumbered suit in O.S.C.F.R.No.5423 of

¶18

2016 for declaration and permanent injunction.

¶19

The District Munsif Court, Tirupur, returned the papers raising a

¶20

query with regard to the maintainability of the suit.

¶21

The plaintiff represented the papers before Trial Court, stating the

¶22

reasons for the maintainability of the suit.

¶23

On 20.12.2016, the Trial Court returned the papers again, stating

¶24

that the previous returns were not complied with and proper court fee has not been paid by the plaintiff. Challenging this order, the plaintiff has filed the above Civil Revision Petition.

¶25

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that

¶26

the plaintiff was not given an opportunity to make his submissions, with regard to maintainability of the suit before the Trial Court. Therefore, an opportunity may be given to the plaintiff to make his submissions before the Trail Court

¶27

¶28

In these circumstances, I am of the view, that the plaintiff should be given an opportunity to make his submissions before the Trial Court, with regard to the queries raised by the Trail Court.

¶29

Accordingly, I give liberty to the petitioner-plaintiff to make his

¶30

submissions with regard to the queries raised by the Trial Court, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the court is not satisfied, with the submissions made on behalf of the plaintiff, the Trial Court may number the suit, if not, necessary orders can be passed by the Trial Court considering the submissions made by the plaintiff.

¶31

With these observations, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶32

16.03.2017

¶33

Index : Yes/No

¶34

Note :(i) The Registry is directed to return the original plaint filed by the petitioner in the Civil Revision Petition to the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶35

(ii) Issue copy of the order by 20.03.2017

District Munsif Court Tirupur.

¶40

M. DURAISWAMY,J.,

¶41

¶42

C.R.P.(PD)No.1001 of 2017

¶43

16.03.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in

Sri P.Easwaran v. Sri R.Annadurai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri P.Easwaran v. Sri R.Annadurai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Hariram Vs P.Boopathy

K.Jayakumar Vs K.Elumalai @ Rajendran

K.Raja Vs Karuppa Gounder

Thangam Periasami Educational Vs Senthamizhselvi

Sathya,W/O.Arun Kumar Vs Arunkumar,S/O.Ganesan

Farhana Kalil Vs Sasikumar