Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Mahan Vs Jayalakshmi — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2021)

Home
Madras HC
2021
Mahan Vs JayalakshmiMahan v. Jayalakshmi

Dismissed

Mahan v. Jayalakshmi

Madras HC23 Sept 2021CRP/1652/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Civil Revision Petition dismissed due to non-prosecution; petitioner has not pursued the matter for six years despite hearing opportunities.

What did the court decide?

No costs.

What the court decided

AI extract

A

CRP (NPD)No.1652 of 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 23.09.2021

CORAM

The Hon'ble Mr.Justice Krishnan Ramasamy

C.R.P (NPD)No.1652 of 2015

Mohan

..Revision Petitioner

vs.
1. Mrs.Jayalakshmi
2. Ramesh
3. Narayanamoorthy
..Respondents
PRAYER:

Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure to allow this Revision petition and to set aside the order & decreetal order made in I.A.No.149/2014 in O.S.No.81 of 2012 dated 21.01.2015 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Thiruthuraipoondi, Tiruvarur District.

For Revision Petitioner - M/S.N.Palanivel, No appearance For Respondents-R-1 - Door Locked For Respondents-R-2 - Notice not ready

For Respondents-R-3 - Mr.K.Chandrasekaran, No appearance

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Mohan
respondent
Mrs. Jayalakshmi
respondent
Ramesh
respondent
Narayanamoorthy

Coram

AI extract

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 23 Sept 2021 · September
Registered: 16 Apr 2015
Case no.: CRP/1652/2015

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Krishnan Ramasamy

Duraisamy,S/O.K.a.Subbaraya Vs Nallasamy Gounder
22 Sept 2021
The Chairman Vs Pattupilla
22 Sept 2021
Mrs Samsath Begam Vs P.Arujunan
22 Sept 2021
Kamala Vs Malliga
23 Sept 2021
A.R Abdul Thurab Vs Tamilnadu Wakf Board

Cite this judgement

Mahan v. Jayalakshmi, CRP/1652/2015 (MAD), decided on 23 September 2021.

The Madras High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Bench / Coram

Krishnan Ramasamy

Parties & counsel

Outcome

No costs.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

The Revision Petition was dismissed for non-prosecution. The matter had been pending for over six years without progress. At the time of the order, the petitioner did not appear, and service notices were not filed. The Court held that the lack of pursuit by the petitioner justified dismissal without need for further adjournment or inquiry.

A compact analysis

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.

O R D E R

This Civil Revision Petition was filed in the year 2015. When the

Revision Petition came up for first hearing on 01.06.2015, this Court passed

the following order:-

1/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

CRP (NPD)No.1652 of 2015

“Notice of motion returnable in four weeks. Private notice is also permitted.”

2. It is seen from the Order Sheet that, after the said date, the matter

was not listed. Thus, for the past six years, the matter is pending without any progress and the revision petitioner has not taken any steps to get the matter listed. Even today, when the matter is called, none appeared for the revision petitioner. Further, notice in respect of the respondents was also not effected and no Affidavit of Service (AOS) was filed, which per se shows that the revision petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the case. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to keep this matter pending any more. Hence, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. 23.09.2021

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking Order sd

2/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

CRP (NPD)No.1652 of 2015

To

The District Munsif, Thiruthuraipoondi, Tiruvarur District.

3/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

CRP (NPD)No.1652 of 2015

Krishnan Ramasamy, J., sd

C.R.P (NPD)No.1652 of 2015
23.09.2021

4/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

Krishnan Ramasamy

CNR

HCMA010256942015

Topic

Civil Procedure and Limitation

Bench

Krishnan Ramasamy

Disposal

DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION

23 Sept 2021

Muniammal Vs Ponni (Died)

23 Sept 2021