P.Bhavani v. P.Parimala
Case brief
What is this about?
High Court revisited the impugned order rejecting a plaint for limitation. Held that rejection without numbering is improper; directed Registry to number the suit within one week if otherwise in order.
What did the court decide?
Directing the Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai, to instruct its Registry to number the suit O.S. No. 39106/2018 within one week.
What the court decided
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.12.2018
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH
CRP.(NPD).No.3780 of 2018
P.Bhavani
..Petitioner
vs.
1.Mrs.P.Parimala
2.Mrs.S.Lashmi
3.Mrs.Brinda Sundararajan
4.P.R.Raghunath
5.Mrs.Niranjana Srinivasan
6.Mrs.Revathy Srinivasan
7.Mrs.P.Vedam
8.Mr.R.Parthasarathy
9.Mrs.R.Shantha
10.R.Srinivasan
11.N.R.Varadharajan
12.R.Manjula
13.N.R.Raghavan .. Respondents
2
Prayer :- Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the order and to number that O.S.Sr.No.39106 /2018, on the file of the I Assistant City Civil Court at Chennai dated 13.08.2018 and praying to set aside the same and allow the petition as prayed for.
For Petitioner : Mr. P.Sivamani
O R D E R
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Trial Court was justified in rejecting the plaint without numbering due to limitation issues in the absence of contemplated procedure in CPC.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
P. Bhavani
- respondent
Mrs. P. Parimala
- respondent
Mrs. S. Lashmi
- respondent
Mrs. Brinda Sundararajan
- respondent
P.R. Raghunath
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court