Allowed

Chandramathi v. Vaduvammal

Madras HC21 Dec 2020CRP/70/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The revision petition was allowed to restore a partition suit dismissed for default. The court considered the petitioners' explanation regarding pregnancy and lack of respondent representation, directing the trial court to dispose of the suit on merits within six months upon payment of costs.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; original IA allowed on payment of Rs.1,000/- costs; suit to be disposed of on merits within six months.

Chandramathi Vs Vaduvammal — Partition | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

CRP(NPD)No.70 of 2017

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

RESERVED ON : 17.12.2020 PRONOUNCED ON : 21.12.2020

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.A.NAKKIRAN

¶6

CRP(NPD)No.70 of 2017
(Through Video Conferencing)
1. Chandramathi
2. Krishnakumari Petitioners
Vs
1. Vaduvammal
2. Minor Muthuseelan represented by 1st Respondent
3. Tamilarasi
4. Sakunthala Respondents
Prayer:- This Civil Revision Petition has been filed, under Section 227 of the
Constitution of India, against the order and decree, dated 7.9.2016, made in
IA.No.239 of 2015 in OS.No.69 of 2010, by the District Munsif Cum Judicial
Magistrate, Vedaranyam.

¶7

For Petitioner : Mr.K.M.Subramnian

¶8

For Respondent : No appearance

¶9

ORDER

¶10

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed, against the order and decree, dated 7.9.2016, made in IA.No.239 of 2015 in OS.No.69 of 2010, by the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Vedaranyam.

¶11

The facts of the case, in a nutshell, are that the Plaintiffs are the Petitioners and the Defendants are the Respondents. The suit was filed for partition and

¶12

1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in

¶13

CRP(NPD)No.70 of 2017

¶14

separate possession. In the suit, the Petitioners have filed the present application to condone the delay of 825 days in filing the application to restore the suit, which was dismissed for default on 12.12.2012. By the impugned order, the said application was dismissed. Hence, this Civil Revision Petition has been filed.

¶15

This court heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and also carefully perused the materials placed on record.

¶16

According to the Petitioners, since 2^nd Petitioner was pregnant and at the stage of delivery, the 1^st Petitioner had to look after her and hence, they could not appear on 12.12.2002, which resulted in dismissing the suit for default and the said reason was not properly considered by the court below.

¶17

Before the Trial Court, in the present application the respondents 1 and 2 have not filed any counter and the respondents 3 and 4 did not appear before the court and all the respondents were set exparte. Even before this Court, there is no representation for the Respondents. This is a partition suit. Hence, in the interest of justice and in order to give one more opportunity, the present application may be allowed, however, on payment of cost.

¶18

In fine, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed. The impugned order, dated 7.9.2016, made in IA.No.239 of 2015 in OS.No.69 of 2010, by the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Vedaranyam is set aside and said IA is allowed on payment of cost of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) to the Taluk Level Legal Aid Services Authority, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Since the suit is of the year 2010,

¶19

2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in

¶20

CRP(NPD)No.70 of 2017

¶21

the Trial Court is directed to dispose of the suit, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six months thereafter. No costs.

¶22

21.12.2020

¶23

Index:Yes/No Web:Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking Srcm

¶24

¶25

The District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Vedaranyam

¶26

3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in

¶27

CRP(NPD)No.70 of 2017

¶28

A.A.NAKKIRAN, J.

¶29

Srcm

¶30

Pre-Delivery Order in
CRP(NPD)No.70 of 2017
21.12.2020

¶31

4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in

Chandramathi v. Vaduvammal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandramathi v. Vaduvammal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Chandran Vs N.Damodaran

S.Thirunavukarasu Vs Thiruvannamalai Gandhi Nagar

N.V. Chakrapani Vs M/S Rapajawasa Finance Mart

P.S. Khaleel Vs N. Hansardeen

R. Seenu Vs N. Porkodi

K.Srinivasa Reddy Vs Jagannatha Reddy