In the absence of the revision petitioners who failed to appear or take steps to serve notice, the High Court dismissed two pending civil revision petitions under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act for non-prosecution.
The revision petitions were dismissed for non-prosecution and no costs were awarded.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06.03.2019
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
CRP NPD No.1728 and 1729 of 2008
K.Chandrasekara Reddy (since deceased) Represented by his L.Rs:
Prayer : Civil Revision Petitions filed under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act 1960 as amended by Act 1973 and 1980 read with Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the order dated 04.09.2007 passed in R.C.A.No.1214 of 2005 and 1229 of 2005 by the VII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai against the order dated 23.09.2005 passed in RCOP No.1794 of 2004 by the XV Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
For Revision Petitioners : No appearance.
When the matter is listed today, no representation on behalf of the revision petitioners. Both the revision petitions are pending from the year 2008. Despite permitting the petitioners to issue private notice, the petitioners have not taken any steps to serve the notice to the respondent. The above facts clearly indicates that the petitioners are not
interested in prosecuting the case. Hence, the revision petitions are dismissed for non prosecution. No costs. mst
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VIII)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1. The VII Judge,
Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
2. The XV Judge,
Court of Small Causes, Chennai.
CRP No.1728 and 1729 of 2008
Kak(03/07/2019)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the revision petitions should be allowed in the absence of the petitioners.
Whether dismissal of the petitions on account of lack of prosecution is justified.
K.Chandrasekara Reddy represented by his L.Rs: Kalavathi, Girija, K.Vijayakumar
K.M.Ahamadullah Basha
N. Sathish Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
