Allowed

P. Sundarambal v. Kalpana Bhandari

Madras HC23 Aug 2017CRP/2949/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil revision petition filed under Article 227, the High Court of Madras directed the lower court to number a suit alleging a contract for property transfer. The Court set aside the rejection of the plaint, observing that the presence of part performance required an elaborate trial rather than dismissal at the threshold.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the II Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai to number the suit O.S.SR.No.18478 of 2017 and proceed further in accordance with law.

P. Sundarambal Vs Kalpana Bhandari — Property and Title | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 23.08.2017

¶4

C O R A M

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M. GOVINDARAJ

¶6

C.R.P.(NPD) No.2949 of 2017
and C.M.P.No.13946 of 2017

¶7

P.Sundarambal
2. P.Babu
3. P.Balu
4. P.Dayalan ... Petitioners
Vs.
1. Kalpana Bhandari
2. Tarachand Bhandari ... Respondents

¶8

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to direct the learned II Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, to number the suit in O.S.SR.No.18478 of 2017, dated 06.04.2017 and take on the file of the II Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Udayakumar O R D E R

¶10

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed to direct the

¶11

learned II Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, to number the suit

¶12

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶13

¶14

in O.S.SR.No.18478 of 2017, dated 06.04.2017 and take on the file of the

¶15

learned II Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.

¶16

Aggrieved over the rejection of the plaint, even without

¶17

numbering, the petitioners/plaintiffs have come before this Court.

¶18

The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that

¶19

the trial Court has observed that the letter, which was given by the

¶20

parties can only be treated as an offer and therefore, the suit is not maintainable.

¶21

But from a perusal of the pleadings and documents, it is

¶22

seen that there is an offer of remittance and pursuant to the same, there

¶23

is some material shows part performance and the plaintiff has been put

¶24

in possession of the properties. All these matters can be decided only

¶25

after an elaborate trial. Shutting the doors on the threshold itself without giving an opportunity is not correct.

¶26

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶27

¶28

Therefore, this Court issues a direction to the II Additional

¶29

Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, to number the suit in O.S.SR.No.18478

¶30

of 2017 filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs and proceed further in

¶31

accordance with law.

¶32

With the above direction, this Civil Revision Petition is
disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
23.08.2017
asi
To
The II Additional Judge, City City Court, Chennai.

¶33

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶34

¶35

M. GOVINDARAJ, J.

¶36

asi

¶37

C.R.P.(NPD) No.2949 of 2017
and C.M.P.No.13946 of 2017

¶38

23.08.2017

¶39

http://www.judis.nic.in

P. Sundarambal v. Kalpana Bhandari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P. Sundarambal v. Kalpana Bhandari

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

Shanmugam Vs Vijayalakshmi

Sheshadri@Shekhar@ Vs Vaishnavi

R. Nandakumar Vs N. Prabhakar

Kandasamy Vs Mohanasundaram

A.Martin Vs C.Rani

R.Srinivasan Vs the District Collector