Dismissed

Madasamy v. Soundarapandian

Madras HC6 Aug 2019CRP(MD)/1810/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a single-paragraph order by the Madras High Court dismissing a pending civil revision petition. The court held that since a respondent died in 2015 and legal heirs were not impleaded, and the petitioner's status could not be ascertained, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending, leading to dismissal as abated.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petition dismissed as abated, no costs, and connected miscellaneous petition closed.

Madasamy Vs Soundarapandian — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

C.R.P.(MD)(NPD)No.1810 of 2010

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 06.08.2019

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR

¶6

C.R.P.(MD)(NPD)No.1810 of 2010 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2010

¶7

Madasamy :Petitioner/Petitioner/1^st Defendant

¶8

vs.

¶9

1.Soundarapandian 2.Hanifa :Respondents/Respondents/Plaintiff

¶10

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to set aside the order, dated 07.06.2010 made in I.A.No.615 of 2008 in O.S.No.227 of 1991 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Ramanathapuram.

¶11

For Petitioner :Mr.PT.S.Narendravasan R1 :Dismissed For R2 :Mr.S.Ramesh ***

¶12

ORDER

¶13

This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order passed in I.A.No.615 of 2008 in O.S.No.227 of 1991 by the learned District Munsif, Ramanathapuram.

¶14

2.This Civil Revision Petition is pending from 2010. The learned Counsel appearing for the second respondent filed a memo stating that the second respondent died on 13.12.2015. The particulars of the legals heirs of the deceased second respondent were also given in the memo. Though the death of the second respondent was reported and duly informed to the petitioner on 20.03.2019, no steps have been taken so far, to implead the legal heirs of the deceased second respondent.

¶15

3.That apart, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that he was informed about the death of the petitioner recently. However, the learned Counsel for the petitioner is unable to confirm https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶16

1/2

¶17

C.R.P.(MD)(NPD)No.1810 of 2010

¶18

the same and furnish any further details, as to the status of the petitioner, whether he is alive or not. In such circumstances, having regard to the fact that one of the respondents died on 13.12.2015, this Court is able to see that no useful purpose will be served by keeping this matter pending. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as abated. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶19

Sd/-

¶20

Assistant Registrar (CS-II)

¶21

// True Copy //

¶22

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS )

¶23

¶24

The District Munsif, Ramanathapuram.

¶25

Copy To: The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. (2 copies ) C.R.P.(MD)(NPD)No.1810 of 2010 06.08.2019 CS(16.08.2019) 2P 4C

¶26

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶27

2/2

Madasamy v. Soundarapandian

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madasamy v. Soundarapandian

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

Radha Bai Vs Ramakrishnan

N.Radha Bai Vs Mrs.Maruthambal

Samson Debase Vs Anbiah Fernando @ X.a.Datross

M/S. National Insurance Co.Ltd Vs Chinnathal

Rajambal Vs Navaneetha Krishnan

J.Sathish Vs v.Preethu