Civil revision dismissing petition challenging Additional District Munsif's order allowing a temple trustee to prosecute suit after colleague's death; Court held no illegity and dismissed petition.
Petition dismissed. Principal District Munsif directed to dispose of three suits within three months.
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: 05.01.2018
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
C.R.P.(PD)No.4631 of 2014
and M.P.No.1 of 2014
1.Lakshmi
2.Maheswari
3.Anusuya ... Petitioners
Vs.
1.Thulukanathamman Temple
Alandur Rep.by its Trustee
Venkatesan (died)
S/o Raghupathy Pillai
11, 3 rd Morrison Street, Alandur
Chennai – 600 016, Saidapet Taluk
2.Balachandar
3.Sampathkumar ... Respondents
PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order and decree passed in I.A.No.1/2012 in O.S.No.368 of 2004 dated 20th day of June, 2012 passed by the learned Additional District Munsif at Alandur.
2
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Gopalrathnam For Respondents : Mr.T.Thiagarajan for RR2 and RR3
Not ready in notice Reg. RR1
O R D E R
This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the order and decree passed in I.A.No.1/2012 in O.s.No.368 of 2004 dated 20th day of June, 2012 passed by the learned Additional District Munsif at Alandur.
3
3(a) The first petitioner filed counter affidavit and the same was adopted by third petitioner. The petitioners 1 and 3 made various averments against the third respondent. They contended that the third respondent was represented only in his individual capacity and without there being any document, the third respondent cannot represent the first respondent temple. The learned Judge, considering all the materials on record, affidavit and counter affidavit, allowed the application.
4
averments made in the counter and contended that the third respondent Sampath Kumar is not a trustee and the learned Judge, without properly appreciating the averments in the counter filed by
the petitioners 1 and 3, allowed the application.
5
6
Hence, the Principal District Munsif, Alandur is directed to dispose of all the three suits, as expeditiously as possible, in any event, not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order.
05.01.2018
rgr
To
1. The Principal District Munsif,
Alandur.
2. The Additional District Munsif,
Alandur.
7
V.M.VELUMANI, J.
rgr
C.R.P.(PD)No.4631 of 2014
05.01.2018
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the learned judge committed an irregularity in allowing an application to implead a trustee as a plaintiff after the death of another trustee.
Whether the High Court should interfere with the impugned order allowing the third respondent to represent the temple.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Lakshmi
Maheswari
Anusuya
Thulukanathamman Temple
Balachandar
Sampathkumar
V.M.Velumani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
