Civil Revision Petition under Section 115 CPC challenging an order in an execution petition. High Court dismissed the petition as infructuous because the main execution petition before the subordinate court was already disposed of, rendering the revision needless.
Civil Revision Petition dismissed on the ground that the main petition was disposed of.
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.
CRP(NPD).No.2208 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.10.2021
C O R A M
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
C.R.P.(NPD)No.2208 of 2015
and M.P.No.1 of 2015
T.B.Mathan (since deceased)
Lakshmi (since deceased)
A.Manian (since deceased)
1.M.Krishnakumar
2.Prema
3.Rajeswari
4.Revathi
5.Vanaja
6.Gowri
7.Geetha ...Petitioners
Vs
1.Rangammal
2.V.Mathiah (since deceased)
3.M.Chandra Sekaran
4.G.Raman
5.Malathi ... Respondents
Prayer Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 16.07.2014 made in E.A.No.56 of 2014 in E.P.No.71 of 2005 in O.S.No.282 of 1996, on the file of the Subordinate Court of the Nilgirs, Uthagamandalam.
1/4
CRP(NPD).No.2208 of 2015
For Petitioners : Mr.Krishnakumar
for Mr.Sarvabhauman Associates For R1 & R3 : Mr.G.Rajkumar for Mr.S.Ramasamy Law Associates R2 : Died For R4 : Notice not ready For R5 : No Appearance
ORDER
When the matter is taken up for hearing today i.e (05.10.2021), the
learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing for
the respondent Nos.1 and 3 submitted that the main E.P., itself disposed of,
hence, the matter has become infructuous and nothing survives for further adjudication in the Civil Revision Petition.
2.Recording the submission made by either side learned counsel, this
Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
05.10.2021 Index: Yes Internet:Yes Speaking order/Non Speaking Order
rst
2/4
CRP(NPD).No.2208 of 2015
To:
The Subordinate Judge of the Nilgirs, Uthagamandalam.
3/4
CRP(NPD).No.2208 of 2015
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY,J.
r st
C.R.P.(NPD)No.2208 of 2015
and M.P.No.1 of 2015
05.10.2021
4/4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Civil Revision Petition should be dismissed as infructuous given the disposal of the main execution petition.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
1.M.Krishnakumar
2.Prema
3.Rajeswari
4.Revathi
5.Vanaja
6.Gowri
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
