V. Bharani v. N. Rangaraj
Case brief
What is this about?
Revision petition allowing setting aside orders dismissing applications to restore suits due to non-appearance. Court grants restoration subject to costs and prosecution.
What did the court decide?
Set aside impugned orders dismissing I.A. No.387 of 2013 and I.A. No.55 of 2013; restorable suit to be disposed of within four weeks. Petitioner to pay Rs.2,000/- costs.
What the court decided
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATUE AT MADRAS
DATED 07.02.2018
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
C.R.P. (NPD) No.167 of 2018
Bharani .. Petitioner
Versus
Rangaraj .. Respondent
Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code against the order and decreetal order dated 30.10.2014 made in I.A. No.387 of 2013 in I.A. No.55 of 2013 in O.S. No.37 of 2008 on the file of the Court of the Principal Sub Judge at Pondicherry.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Dhanasekaran
For Respondent : Mr.T.S.Baskaran
ORDER
The petitioner has filed O.S.No.37 of 2008 before the Principal Sub Court, Puducherry for declaration and permanent injunction. The aforesaid suit was dismissed for default on 10.12.2012. Therefore, the petitioner filed an application in I.A. No.55 of 2013 to restore the suit. The said application was also dismissed on 27.08.2013. Again an application in I.A. No.387 of 2013 was filed to restore the I.A. No.55 of 2013, which was also dismissed by the Court below.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned orders dismissing applications to restore suits were correct given the petitioner's claim of bonafide reasons for absence.
Whether the Civil Revision Petition should be allowed to set aside the orders and direct disposal of the restoration application on merits.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Bharani
- respondent
Rangaraj
Coram
D.KrishnaKumar
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court