The Madurai Bench dismissed the Civil Revision Petition seeking to strike off a plaint for specific performance, holding that the remedy lies before the Sub Court under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. The court directed the trial court to dispose of the suit within three months.
Civil Revision Petition dismissed; trial court directed to dispose suit within 3 months.
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.
C.R.P. (PD) (MD)No.2274 of 2011
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18.10.2019 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA
C.R.P. (PD) (MD)No.2274 of 2011 and M.P(MD) No.1 of 2011
K.Ponramalingam
Sivamani
... Petitioner/Defendant Vs.
... Respondent/Plaintiff
PRAYER:- Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to struck off the plaint in O.S.No.346 of 2010 on the file of Sub Court, Palani.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.Sundaravadivel For Respondent : Mr.S.R.Sureshkumar
ORDER
The short point involved in the above civil revision petition which has been filed to strike off the plaint in O.S.No.346 of 2010 on the file of Sub Court, Palani, is whether the suit filed for specific performance on the basis of un-registered agreement of sale dated 20.03.2008 which contains a recital that possession has been handed over, can be maintained, since the deed is not registered. The defendant has directly come by way of an revision invoking the superintending jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of Constitution of India. The petitioner has a remedy before the trial Court in the form of petition under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure and without exhausting that remedy the petitioner/defendant has straight away come to this Court.
2.This Court is of the opinion that the remedy available to the petitioner is only before the Sub Court, Palani, invoking the provision of Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Hence, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. The petitioner is directed to work out his remedy before the Sub Court, Palani.
3.After the arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the written statement has already been filed and therefore, the Court below may be directed to dispose of the suit within a time frame. While dismissing the civil revision petition, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ this Court directs the learned Subordinate Judge, Palani, shall
1/2
C.R.P. (PD) (MD)No.2274 of 2011
dispose of the suit in O.S.No.346 of 2010 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar (CS-II)
// True Copy //
Sub Assistant Registrar(CS )
To
The Subordinate Judge, Palani.
+1 CC to Mr.S.R.SURESH KUMAR, Advocate ( SR-93216[F] dated 21/10/2019 )
+1 CC to Mr.C.SUNDARAVADIVEL, Advocate ( SR-93370[F] dated 21/10/2019 )
C.R.P. (PD) (MD)No.2274 of 2011 and M.P(MD) No.1 of 2011 18.10.2019
CP
MK (13.11.2019) 2P 4C
2/2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a civil revision petition aggrieved by non-striking off of a plaint for specific performance can be maintained when the remedy lies under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.
Whether the petitioner could have exhausted the remedy under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC before approaching the High Court under Article 227.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
K.Ponramalingam
Sivamani
Respondent
P.T. Asha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
