Dismissed

Mohamed Ibrahim @ Kaalu v. Ismail @ Pyaru

Madras HC29 Aug 2019CRP/3748/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed two Civil Revision Petitions for default because no steps were taken to serve notice on respondents and the petitioner could not be contacted, indicating lack of interest in prosecution. Connected miscellaneous petitions were also closed.

What did the court decide?

Civil revision petitions dismissed for default; connected miscellaneous petitions closed. No costs awarded.

Mohamed Ibrahim @ Kaalu Vs Ismail @ Pyaru — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

C.R.P. (PD) No.3748 of 2014

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated : 29.08.2019

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

¶6

C.R.P. (NPD) Nos.3748 and 3749 of 2014

¶7

and
CMP Nos.12665, 12669, 12679 and 12682
and
Mp. No.1 of 2014
Mohamed Ibrahim @ Kaalu ... Petitioner in both
C.R.P.s
Vs.
Ismail @ Pyaru ... Respondent in
both C.R.P.s

¶8

Prayer in C.R.P. (NPD) No.3748 of 2014

¶9

Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of C.P.C. against the order dated 14.08.2014 made in M.P. No.630 of 2013 in M.P. No.82 of 2013 in R.C.A. No.279 of 2012 on the file of VIII Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai and prays to set aside the same.

¶10

Prayer in C.R.P. (NPD) No.3749 of 2014

¶11

Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of C.P.C. against the order dated 14.08.2014 made in M.P. No.628 of 2013 in R.C.A. No.280 of 2012, on the file of VIII Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai and prays to set aside the same.

¶12

For Petitioner in both C.R.P.s : Mr.B. Manivannan For Respondent in both C.R.P.s : Mr.T.K.S. Gandhi

¶13

1/3

¶14

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶15

C.R.P. (PD) No.3748 of 2014

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

These matters are listed under the caption “for dismissal”, today. Till date, no steps have been taken to serve the notice on the respondents in CMP Nos.12665, 12669, 12679 and 12682 of 2019. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that he is unable to contact the petitioner. It can now be inferred that the petitioner is not interested to prosecute these revision petitions. Accordingly, these Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed for default. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 29.08.2019 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-speaking Order vsi2 To The VIII Judge, Small Causes Court, Chennai. ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

¶18

2/3

¶19

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶20

C.R.P. (PD) No.3748 of 2014

¶21

vsi2

¶22

C.R.P. (NPD) Nos.3748 and 3749 of 2014
29.08.2019

¶23

3/3

¶24

http://www.judis.nic.in

Mohamed Ibrahim @ Kaalu v. Ismail @ Pyaru

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohamed Ibrahim @ Kaalu v. Ismail @ Pyaru

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Repco Home Finance Ltd. Vs T.Nagarajan

Sharada Vs L.Moolchand

S.Baskaran Vs Mr.G.Kanagaraj

District Forest Officer Vs Muthusamy

G. Kamaraj Vs the Dist Collector

John Fernandez Vs K.M.Bellaraj