Allowed

Malathi @ Hepshipa Malathi v. Raj Bharath

Madras HC27 Mar 2018CMP(MD)/5508/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, led by Justice J. Nisha Banu, disposed of a petition seeking condonation of delay. The court approved the condonation subject to payment of legal aid costs, dismissing the petition automatically if funds were not remitted within a week.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 121 days condoned subject to payment of Rs. 500 to the Legal Aid Service Authority within one week; failure results in automatic dismissal.

Malathi @ Hepshipa Malathi Vs Raj Bharath — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

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

¶2

Tuesday, the Twenty Seventh day of March Two Thousand Eighteen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mrs.Justice J.NISHA BANU

¶5

CMP(MD) No.5508 of 2017 IN CRP(MD) No.SR1719 of 2017

¶6

MALATHI @ HEPSHIPA MALATHI ... PETITIONER/PETITIONER

¶7

¶8

1 RAJ BHARATH 2 SIVASANKARAN, 3 SORNALATHA ... RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

¶9

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 121 days in representing the above C.R.P.S.R (MD) No.1719 of 2017 and pass such further or other orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render Justice.

¶10

PRAYER IN CRP(MD) No.SR1719 of 2017:

¶11

Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the order of rejection on the file of the learned Family Court, Tirunelveli passed in Unnumbered O.S.No. /2016 dated 19.10.2016 by directing the Learned Family Court, Tirunelveli to take the plaint on its file and to dispose it of on merits in accordance with law by allowing this Revision Petition.

¶12

ORDER : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.V.BALAJI, Advocate for the petitioner the court made the following order:-

¶13

This Petition has been filed to condone the delay of 121 days in representing the above Civil Revision Petition.

¶14

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner.

¶15

Considering the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of this petition and also considering the period of delay, this Court is inclined to condone the delay subject to the payment https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ of cost of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred Only) to the Legal Aid Service Authority, attached to this Bench, within a Period of one

¶16

week form 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.

¶17

sd/27/03/2018 / TRUE COPY /

¶18

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

¶19

¶20

THE JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, TIRUNELVELI.

¶21

COPY TO : THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, LEGAL AID SERVICE AUTHORITY, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶22

GJM/PN/SAR-4-2.4.18-2P-3C

¶23

ORDER IN CMP(MD) No.5508 of 2017 IN CRP(MD) No.SR1719 of 2017 Date :27/03/2018

¶24

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

Malathi @ Hepshipa Malathi v. Raj Bharath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Malathi @ Hepshipa Malathi v. Raj Bharath

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. Ambuga Vs S.Veluchamy(Died),v. Alagammal

S.Anandavalli Vs M.Balachandran

R.T. Seetharaman Vs S. Sivakumar

Sundaradhas(Died) Vs Ponnamperumal @ Muthunayagom

S.Melbin John, Vs S.Melba Jeevi

K.Kanthavel Vs Ramachandran