Disposed

Edward Raj, v. Antony Kumar

Madras HC2 Apr 2018CMP(MD)/2211/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single bench of the Madras High Court admitted a condonation of delay petition filed by the appellant to restore a previously dismissed execution application. The court condoned the 325-day lapse subject to payment of Rs. 500 legal aid cost.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 325 days in restoration petition is condoned subject to payment of Rs. 500 to Legal Aid Authority within one week.

Edward Raj, Vs Antony Kumar — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction )

¶3

Monday, the Second day of April Two Thousand Eighteen

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mrs.Justice J.NISHA BANU

¶6

CMP(MD) No.2211 of 2018 IN

¶7

CMA(MD) No.SR.45631 of 2016

¶8

1 EDWARD RAJ 2 GNANASELVAM ... PETITIONERS / APPELLANTS

¶9

1 ANTONY KUMAR

¶10

2 THE BRANCH MANAGER

¶11

SHRI RAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., OFFICE AT E-8 RIICO INDUSTRIAL AREA,

¶12

SITAPURA JAIPUR ,

¶13

RAJASTHAN-302 022 ... RESPONDENTS / RESPONDENTS

¶14

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to condone the delay of 325 days Restoration in CMP(MD) No.208 of 2017 in CMA(MD) SR.No.45631 of 2016 dated 15.3.2017 on the file of this Honourable Court and thus render justice.

¶15

PRAYER IN CMA(MD) No.SR.45631 of 2016:-

¶16

to allow this appeal and enhance the award amount in M.C.O.P.No.1233 of 2013 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, (II Additional District Judge), Tirunelveli, dated 16.04.2015

¶17

ORDER : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of MR.T.SELVAKUMARAN, Advocate for the petitioner and the court made the following order:-

¶18

This petition has been filed to condone the delay of 325 days in filing a petition to restore the petition in CMP(MD)No.208 of 2017 in CRP(MD)No.SR45631 of 2016, which was dismissed on 15.03.2017.

¶19

Considering the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition and also considering the length of delay, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ this Court is inclined to condone the delay, subject to the payment of cost of Rs.500/-(Rupees Five Hundred only) to the Legal Aid

¶20

¶21

Service Authority, attached to this Bench, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which, this petition shall stand dismissed automatically, without any further reference to this Court.

¶22

This petition is accordingly ordered.

¶23

sd/02/04/2018 / TRUE COPY /

¶24

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶25

¶26

THE MOTOR ACCIDENTY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, (II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE), TIRUNELVELI

¶27

COPY TO:THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, LEGAL AID SERVICES AUTHORITY, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI

¶28

gk JAM/05/04/2018/ CM-VR / SAR 1/ 2p-3c

¶29

ORDER IN CMP(MD) No.2211 of 2018 IN CMA(MD) No.SR.45631 of 2016 Date :02/04/2018

¶30

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

Edward Raj, v. Antony Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Edward Raj, v. Antony Kumar

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

Kaliyammal, Vs Palaniyammal

M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Vs Ramasami

B.Venkatesh Prabu Vs S.Subramani

The Managing Director, Vs Minor Sathish Babu

The Divisional Manager, Vs Deivanai

Tmt. E. Nirmala Devi Vs K. Sivasami