Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

V.Kalyanasundaram, Vs K.Valli — Execution and Attachment | Madras HC (2017)

Home
Madras HC
2017
V.Kalyanasundaram, Vs K.ValliV.Kalyanasundaram, v. K.Valli

Dismissed

V.Kalyanasundaram, v. K.Valli

Madras HC15 Jun 2017CRP(MD)/1129/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Special leave was granted to file an additional written statement after seven years to expedite trial.

What did the court decide?

Revision dismissed but trial court directed to dispose of suit by December 2017.

What the court decided

AI extract

A

1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 15.06.2017

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN

C.R.P(PD)(MD)No.1129 of 2017 and C.M.P. (MD). No.5162 of 2017

V.Kalyanasundaram : Revision Petitioner/1^st Respondent/ 1^st Defendant

Vs.

1.K.Valli (Through her power of agent P.Shanmugaraj) : 1^st Respondent/Petitioner/Plaintiff 2.P.Arumuga Manohari : 2^nd Respondent/2^nd Respondent / 2^nd Defendant

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the Order and decreetal order dated 25.01.2017 passed in I.A.No.231 of 2016 in O.S.No.134 of 2008 on the file of the First Additional District Court, Tirunelveli.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.P.Senthil

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether to grant special leave to file an additional written statement seven years after the suit was instituted to cure procedural irregularities and expedite the trial.

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
V.Kalyanasundaram
respondent
K.Valli
respondent
P.Arumuga Manohari

Coram

AI extract

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 15 Jun 2017 · June
Registered: 14 Jun 2017
Case no.: CRP(MD)/1129/2017

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from G. Jayachandran

Kanagarathinammal (Died) Vs Spmrm. Muthiah Pillai
14 Jun 2017
J.Jinu Solomon, Vs the State Rep. by
14 Jun 2017
Sekar Vs the Inspector of Police
14 Jun 2017
Kamaraj, Vs Manickam
15 Jun 2017

Cite this judgement

V.Kalyanasundaram, v. K.Valli, CRP(MD)/1129/2017 (MAD), decided on 15 June 2017.

The Madras High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Bench / Coram

Dr.Justice G.Jayachandran

Parties & counsel

Outcome

Revision dismissed but trial court directed to dispose of suit by December 2017.

Issue for consideration

Whether to grant special leave to file an additional written statement seven years after the suit was instituted to cure procedural irregularities and expedite the trial.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil revision petition filed to challenge the trial court's order permitting an additional written statement filed seven years after the suit's institution. The revision court held that the trial court applied its mind and there was prima facie justification. The revision was dismissed with a direction to expedite disposal by end of December 2017.

A compact analysis

This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.

O R D E R

This revision petition is directed against the leave granted by the Trial Court to receive additional written statement after seven years of institution of the suit.

2.The grievance of the revision petitioner is that the suit itself was contested by one Shanmugaraja, proxy of the plaintiff Valli, who is none other the daughter of the first defendant, only to harass the revision petitioner. The case has already been protracted for more than nine years and after completion of the trial, the application has been taken out to file an additional written statement, without even it being presented in the format prescribed. The trial Court, after extracting the additional pleading in different system, has got satisfied with the format https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ and caused to grant leave for reception of additional written statement.

2

3.The Trial Court has also observed that the pleading as found in the additional written statement is subject to proof and evidence at the time of trial. Therefore, since there is prima facie justification to receive the additional pleadings, he has allowed the application. Since, the Trial Court has applied its mind and arrived at a conclusion, subject to proof in the Trial, which need not be disturbed in this revision.

4.The main grievance of the revision petitioner is that by filing one petition or another, the case is being protracted and the defendant is put to great hardship. Therefore, it is suffice to direct the Trial Court to expedite the disposal of the suit at the earliest, preferably by the end of December, 2017.

5.With the above direction, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Sd/-

Assistant Registrar(RTI)

/True Copy/

Sub-Assistant Registrar

To

The First Additional District Judge, The First Additional District Court, Tirunelveli.

+One cc to Mr.M.P.Senthil, Advocate, SR.No.60703

KM/Is

RL/3C/2P/KP/SAR1/30/6/2017

C.R.P(PD)(MD)No.1129 of 2017

15.06.2017

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

Dr.Justice G.Jayachandran

CNR

HCMD010363922017

Topic

Execution and Attachment

Bench

G. Jayachandran

Disposal

DISMISSED

Rajan, Vs Mohamad Ibrahim

15 Jun 2017

Pandidurai Vs the Inspector of Police

15 Jun 2017