The High Court of Madras dismissed a Civil Revision Petition seeking to set aside a lower court order denying an application to re-examine a deceased witness who had been previously escheated in a suit concerning a sale deed.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09.02.2018
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D. KRISHNAKUMAR
CRP(PD).No.349 of 2018 and C.M.P.No.1856 of 2018
1.S.M.Samiathal
2.S.M.Balasubramani
3.S.M.Sathya ..Petitioners
Vs.
1.C.Saradhamani
2.C.Mangayarkarasi Mythili Devi ..Respondents
PRAYER :
Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 24.08.2017 made in I.A.No.519 of 2017 in O.S.No.88 of 2011 on the file of the learned Sub Court, Perundurai by allowing this Civil Revision Petition.
The respondent has filed the suit in O.S.No.88 of 2011 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Perundurai, for cancellation of sale deed dated 26.05.2008 registered in favour of the 4th defendant and consequential permanent injunction. The 4th defendant has filed the written statement on 03.08.2012, disputing the claim of the plaintiff. The trial was commenced and the 4th respondent was examined as DW1 on 30.10.2014. Due to his ailments, thereafter, the evidence of D.W.1 was eschewed.
2
filed.
application is allowed, no prejudice would cause to the respondent.
application was disposed of with liberty to file appropriate application to implead the legal heirs of the 4th defendant. The above order was passed in the year 2015, the petitioner has filed the present application in the year 2017 for the same prayer, which already dismissed in I.A.No.34/2003. Further, there is no reason stated in the affidavit, for the delay in filing the said application, at the stage of arguments. Therefore, there is no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the Court below.
09.02.2018
sk/kak
3
To The Sub Court, Perundurai
4
D.KRISHNAKUMAR. J,
sk/kak
C.R.P.(PD).No.349 of 2018 &
C.M.P.No.1856 of 2018
09.02.2018
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court is aided in setting aside the lower court's order dismissing an application for re-examination of evidence of a deceased witness.
Whether the lack of justification for delay in filing the application by the petitioner warrants the dismissal of the revision petition.
S.M. Samiathal
S.M. Balasubramani
S.M. Sathya
C. Saradhamani
C. Mangayarkarasi Mythili Devi
D. KRISHNAKUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
