Allowed

Meharunnisa v. Thiyagarajan (Died)

Madras HC21 Dec 2018CRP/484/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a Civil Revision Petition under Article 227, setting aside an order that dismissed an application to condone a 1990-day delay in impleading legal heirs, directing the trial court to dispose of the suit expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Set aside impugned order dismissing application to condone delay; condoned the 1990-day delay subject to payment of Rs. 10,000/- costs; directed trial court to conclude suit within six months.

Meharunnisa Vs Thiyagarajan (Died) — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

IN THE COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 21.12.2018

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH

¶6

CRP.(PD).No.484 of 2017

¶7

and
CMP.No.6769 of 2018
Meharunnisa ... Petitioner
Versus
Thiyagarajan(Died)
1.M.Ramamurthi
2.Boopathy
3.Janaki
4.Balachandar
5.Meenakshi ... Respondents

¶8

Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to set aside the Fair and Decreetal order dated 16.09.2016 passed in I.A.No.114 of 2015 in O.S.No.1082 of 2004 on the file of the II Additional District Munsif, Erode.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Jagadeesan For Respondents : Mr.S.Saravanan (for R2) : No Appearance (for R1, R3 to R5)

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed challenging the fair and

¶12

decreetal order dated 16.09.2016 passed in I.A.No.114 of 2015 in O.S.No.1082

¶13

of 2004 on the file of the learned II Additional District Munsif, Erode, wherein

¶14

and whereby the application filed by the petitioner seeking to condone the delay

¶15

of 1990 days in filing the petition to implead the legal heirs of the deceased first

¶16

defendant was dismissed.

¶17

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶18

¶19

2.The reason adduced by the petitioner/plaintiff for not bringing the Legal Heirs of the 1st defendant (deceased) in time is that the suit was earlier dismissed for default and an application filed to set aside and restore the suit was also dismissed, against which, a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in C.M.A.No.27 of 2008 was filed. The said CMA was allowed and the suit was restored. Subsequently, the defendant was set exparte and the suit was also decreed. Later, an application made by the defendants to set aside the exparte

¶20

decree was allowed and the suit was restored.

¶21

3.It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff

¶22

that the petitioner was not aware of the demise of the 1st defendant and she came to know about the details belatedly. All these reasons provided by the petitioner put together would only go to show that the petitioner herein may not have deliberately delayed the proceedings. Nevertheless, since the delay of 1990 days is inordinate, it would be appropriate to put the petitioner on terms.

¶23

4.In the light of the above observations, the impugned order passed in I.A.No.114 of 2015 in O.S.No.1082, dated 16.09.2016, on the file of the learned II Additional District Munsif, Erode is set aside. Consequently, the delay of 1990 days is condoned, subject to the condition that the petitioner pays a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) to the defendants/respondents by way of costs, on or before 07.01.2019.

¶24

5.Since the suit is pending from the year 2004 onwards, the learned trial Judge shall endeavor to complete the suit proceedings as expeditiously as

¶25

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶26

¶27

possible, in any event, within a period of six month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶28

6.Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is ordered. Consequently,

¶29

connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

¶30

21.12.2018
rli/klt
Note: Issue order copy on 03.01.2019

¶31

http://www.judis.nic.in

M.S.RAMESH, J.,

klt/rli

CRP.(PD).No.484 of 2017
and
CMP.No.6769 of 2018
21.12.2018

¶36

http://www.judis.nic.in

Meharunnisa v. Thiyagarajan (Died)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Meharunnisa v. Thiyagarajan (Died)

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

Southern Housing Corporation Vs P.R.Subramanian

Arulimghu Sengaluneer Pillaiyar Temple Vs K.R.Muthukrishnaraja

S. Senthilbabu Vs Sri Lakshmi Enterprises

P.Thirupathi Vs T.Venkataraman

V.Jayabala Subramaniam Vs v.Uthama Sivabalan

Kalaiselvi Vs Viji @ R.Durai Ram