Allowed

Rajasekaran v. Mohankumar

Madras HC29 Aug 2017CRP/2961/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227, setting aside the dismissal of applications to summon a Village Administrative Officer to prove property title. The Court directed the Sub Court to dispose of the underlying suit expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

The Sub Court, Namakkal is directed to dispose of the suit in O.S.No.53 of 2011 as expeditiously as possible with consequences.

Rajasekaran Vs Mohankumar — Property and Title | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 29.08.2017

¶4

C O R A M

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M. GOVINDARAJ

¶6

C.R.P.(PD) Nos.2961 and 2962 of 2017
and C.M.P.No.13999 of 2017

¶7

Rajasekaran ... Petitioner in both C.R.Ps.
Vs.
1. Mohankumar
2. Udhayakumar
3. Natarajan ... Respondents in both C.R.Ps.
PRAYER IN BOTH C.R.Ps.: Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227

¶8

of Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated

¶9

11.07.2017 passed in I.A.Nos.673 and 674 of 2017, respectively, in O.S.No.53 of 2011 on the file of the Sub Court, Namakkal.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Balasubramanian

¶11

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶12

¶13

C O M M O N O R D E R

¶14

This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the dismissal

¶15

of the interlocutory applications in I.A.No.673 of 2017 in O.S.No.53 of

¶16

2011 to re-open the case and I.A.No.674 of 2017 in O.S.No.53 of 2011 to issue subpoena to the Village Administrative Officer, Navamani Village to

¶17

prove the title of the petitioner.

¶18

The trial Court has rightly dismissed on the ground that

¶19

the Village Administrative Officer can only prove the possession of the

¶20

property and he has no role to prove any title of the property and the petitioner/litigating party can alone adduce evidence and prove the title

¶21

of the property. Hence, the trial Court has rightly dismissed the applications.

¶22

However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court issues a direction to the Sub Court, Namakkal, to

¶23

dispose of the suit in O.S.No.53 of 2011 itself as expeditiously as possible.

¶24

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶25

¶26

With the above observations, this Civil Revision Petitions

¶27

are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petition is closed.
29.08.2017
asi
To
The Sub Judge, Sub Court, Namakkal.

¶28

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶29

¶30

M. GOVINDARAJ, J.

¶31

asi

¶32

C.R.P.(PD) Nos.2961 & 2962 of 2017
and C.M.P.No.13999 of 2017

¶33

29.08.2017

¶34

http://www.judis.nic.in

Rajasekaran v. Mohankumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajasekaran v. Mohankumar

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

S.Rakesh Kumar Vs Deekay Electricals

Mr.J.Rajkumar Vs Mrs. Deboral

P.Muthammal Vs P.Devaraj

P.Thirugnanam Vs Inrhirani

Valarmathi Glass Works Vs K.M. Balaji

M. Sumithra Vs T.K. Kumar