Dismissed

Sourastra Kalvi Kuzhu, v. Periambalam P.N.Muralidaran

Madras HC7 Feb 2019CRP(MD)/798/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madarai Bench dismissed the infructuous civil revision petition filed under Article 226. The court held that since the society amended its bye-laws and conducted an election, the underlying suit became infructuous, making the revision petition futile.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petition dismissed as infructuous. Connected miscellaneous petition closed.

Sourastra Kalvi Kuzhu, Vs Periambalam P.N.Muralidaran — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 07.02.2019

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR

¶5

C.R.P(PD)(MD)No.798 of 2013

¶6

and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2013

¶7

1.Sourastra Kalvi Kuzhu,

¶8

Represented by its President,

¶9

No.12/84-A, Sourastra Elementary School Street, Paramakudi Town,

¶10

Ramanathapuram District.

¶11

2.Sourastra Kalvi Kuzhu,

¶12

Represented by its Secretary, No.12/84-A, Sourastra Elementary School Street, Paramakudi Town, Ramanathapuram District. : Petitioners/Defendants

¶13

.. Vs ..

¶14

1.Periambalam P.N.Muralidaran : Respondent/Plaintiff

¶15

2.The District Registrar (Societies), Sivagangai. : 2^nd Respondent/3^rd Defendant

¶16

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to set aside the return order dated 18.04.2013 made in O.S.No.46 of 2013 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Paramakudi and permit the revision petitioner to file vakalath in O.S.No.46 of 2013 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Paramakudi.

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy For Respondents : No appearance

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners stated that the Civil Revision Petition has become infructuous in view of the fact that in tune with the amended bye-laws, election was also conducted. Having regard to the issue that arose for consideration in the suit, it is submitted by the learned Counsel https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ for the petitioners that the suit itself has become infructuous.

¶20

¶21

2.As a result, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶22

Assistant Registrar (CS-III)

¶23

// True Copy //

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶25

¶26

The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Paramakudi.

¶27

+1 cc to Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy , Advocate SR.No.45843

¶28

srm

¶29

C.R.P(PD)(MD)No.798 of 2013 07.02.2019

¶30

KM/(03.05.2019) 2P 3C

¶31

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

Sourastra Kalvi Kuzhu, v. Periambalam P.N.Muralidaran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sourastra Kalvi Kuzhu, v. Periambalam P.N.Muralidaran

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.Murugan, Vs Valli

A.Sankareswari, Vs Union of India

Martin (Nethra) Homoeopathy Vs Union of India

K.M.Jamuna Vs B.R.Sankar

Samuthirapandi Vs Sermabalan

Regina Mary, Vs Sujatha