Dismissed

Alex Arulraj@Alexander v. Stalin Jayaraj

Madras HC7 Mar 2017TR CMP/229/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court dismissed a Transfer Commission Petition filed under Section 24 of CPC. The petitioner sought transfer of a suit due to a compromise and appointment of a commissioner by the Trial Court. The Court held the remedy was to challenge the trial court order elsewhere.

What did the court decide?

The Tr.C.M.P. (No.229 of 2017) and C.M.P. (No.4091 of 2017) are dismissed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition closed.

Alex Arulraj@Alexander Vs Stalin Jayaraj — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 07.03.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE THIRU JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY

¶5

Tr.C.M.P.No.229 of 2017 & C.M.P.No.4091 of 2017

¶6

Alex Arulraj @ Alexander

¶7

... Petitioner
v.
1.Stalin Jayaraj
2.Philomina
3.Jaccob
4.Victoria
5.Sivakumar
6.Mohammed Bazurulla
7.The District Collector
Nagapattinam
The Collectorate, Nagapattinam
Nagapattinam District.
... Respondents
Tr.C.M.P. filed under section 24 of C.P.C., to withdraw and
transfer the above suit in O.S.No.27 of 2010 pending on the file
of the District Court at Nagapattinam to the file of the
District Court at Thanjavur or Thiruvarur or any other
competent court.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Krishnakumar O R D E R

¶9

The 2nd defendant in O.S.No.27 of 2016 on the file of District Court, Nagapattinam, has filed the above Tr.C.M.P. to withdraw the suit in O.S.No.27 of 2010 pending on the file of District Court at Nagapattinam to the file of District Court at Thanjavur or Thiruvarur or any other competent court.

¶10

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that except the 2nd defendant, the other parties entered into compromise and also filed a memorandum of compromise before the Trial Court and the Trial Court even without passing the preliminary decree has appointed an Advocate

¶11

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

¶12

Commissioner for dividing the suit property, hence, the suit should be transferred to some other court.

¶13

When the Trial Court had passed the incorrect and erroneous order, the remedy available to the petitioner-2nd defendant is to challenge the said order in accordance with the provisions of law. In the case on hand, the 2nd defendant has not challenged the order passed by the Trial Court. Instead, he has filed the above petition for transferring the suit from the file of Trial Court to some other Court. The averments stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition cannot be accepted for transferring the suit to the file of some other court.

¶14

In these circumstances, I do not find any merit in the Tr.C.M.P and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Tr.C.M.P. is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶15

-s/dAssistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar Rj 1.The District Judge, Nagapattinam 2.The District Collector Nagapattinam The Collectorate Nagapattinam Nagapattinam District

¶16

+1 cc to M/s.S.M.Raghuram Advocate sr 14580

¶17

Tr.C.M.P.No.229 of 2017 & C.M.P.No.4091 of 2017

¶18

sk(co) aa16/03/2017

¶19

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

Alex Arulraj@Alexander v. Stalin Jayaraj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alex Arulraj@Alexander v. Stalin Jayaraj

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

Narayana Iyer Vs M/S. Anandammal Adheena Trust

Samiyaathaal Vs T.C.Ganesekaran

Bluechip Corporate Vs Syed Maqbul Hussain

M.A.K. Srinivasan Vs v. Vijayalakshmi

G.Jayashankar Vs R.Muralidharan

N.Rajendiran Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer