Dismissed

Radhamangala Nayaki v. Arulmighu Pavowtheeswarer

Madras HC25 Mar 2019CRP/134/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a speaking order regarding Civil Revision Petitions filed under Section 115 CPC against an order passed in 2005, the Hon'ble Court noted the absence of both counsel and the petitioners during hearing in 2019. The Court concluded that there was no purpose in keeping the matter pending and disposed of the petitions by dismissing them for default.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petitions dismissed for default with no order as to costs.

Radhamangala Nayaki Vs Arulmighu Pavowtheeswarer — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 25.03.2019

¶4

C O R A M

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

¶6

C.R.P.(NPD) Nos. 134 and 135 of 2008

¶7

Subbiyan (Died)
2. Radha Maruthesan (Died)
3. Pangajam (Died)
4. Radhamangala Nayaki ... Petitioners in both CRPs
Vs.
Arulmighu Pavavowtheeswarar
Swamy Thirukoil
Thiruthuraipoondi
Represented by its
Managing Trustee ... Respondent in both CRPs

¶8

PRAYER in CRP No. 134 of 2009: The Civil Revision Petition is

¶9

filed under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code against the fair and decreetal order dated 27.01.2005 passed in I.A.No.94 of 2004 in O.S.No.11 of 2000 on the file of District Munsif Thiruthurai Poondi.

¶10

PRAYER in CRP No. 135 of 2009: The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code against the fair and decreetal order dated 27.01.2005 passed in I.A.No.93 of

¶11

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶12

¶13

2004 in O.S.No.11 of 2000 on the file of District Munsif Thiruthurai Poondi.

¶14

For Petitioners in both CRPs : No appearance

¶15

C O M M O N O R D E R

¶16

The Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the

¶17

fair and decreetal order dated 27.01.2005 passed in I.A.Nos.93

¶18

and 94 of 2004 in O.S.No.11 of 2000 on the file of District Munsif

¶19

Thiruthurai Poondi.

¶20

When the matter is taken up for hearing today (25.03.2019), neither the learned counsel for the revision

¶21

petitioners nor revision petitioners is present to represent the case.

¶22

Since the matter pertains to the year 2008 and

¶23

there is no representation on behalf of the revision petitioners, this Court is of the view that there is no purpose in keeping the

¶24

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶25

¶26

revision pending. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is

¶27

dismissed for default. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶28

25.03.2019
msv
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
Speaking order: Non-speaking order
To
The District Munsif Thiruthurai Poondi

¶29

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶30

¶31

N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.

¶32

msv

¶33

C.R.P.(NPD) Nos. 134 and 135 of 2008
25.03.2019

¶34

http://www.judis.nic.in

Radhamangala Nayaki v. Arulmighu Pavowtheeswarer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Radhamangala Nayaki v. Arulmighu Pavowtheeswarer

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

S. Rajalakshmi Vs T. Sivagurunathan

Kasambu Ammal Vs Amar Chand

S.Sengottaiyan Vs P.Selvaraj

Chetlapali Venkataramana Rao Vs Pulapakura Venkateswari D/O.

Indrani Vs Savithiri

Salma Beevi Vs Sri Durga Finance