Dismissed

S.Velu v. K.Rajavel

Madras HC1 Dec 2021CRP/2642/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed a civil revision petition filed under Article 227 seeking to strike off a plaint. The court held that the matter required disposal under Order VII Rule 11 CPC before the trial court and refused to exercise suo motu revisional jurisdiction in the presence of an adequate statutory remedy.

What did the court decide?

Revision dismissed; directed to file application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC in trial court for expeditious disposal.

S.Velu Vs K.Rajavel — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

CRP (PD) No.2642 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 01.12.2021

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

¶6

CRP (PD) No.2642 of 2021 and CMP No.19564 of 2021

¶7

S.Velu

¶8

¶9

K.Rajavel 2. T.N.Raja 3. K.Sathya ... Respondents

¶10

Prayer: The Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to struck off the plaint in O.S.No.10 of 2019 pending on the file of the Additional District Munsif Court, Poonamallee.

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

The petitioner seeks to strike off the plaint in O.S.No.10 of 2019

¶13

on the ground that it is abuse of process of Court and it amounts to re-litigation.

¶14

1/4

¶15

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

¶16

CRP (PD) No.2642 of 2021

¶17

The learned counsel for the petitioner would also draw my attention to the Judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2017 (5) CTC 775 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the award of the Lok Adhalat can be set aside only by way of filing Writ Petition. Therefore, according to him, the suit itself is not maintainable.

¶18

I do not think that I could entertain this revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, in view of the availability of remedy under Order VII Rule 11 of C.P.C., before the trial Court itself. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Virudhunagar Hindu Nadargal Dharma Paribalana Sabai & Ors. Vs. Tuticorin Educational Society & Ors. has held that when an appeal remedy is available under the Code of Civil Procedure, the High Court as a matter of discipline and prudence would not entertain the revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Hence, I do not propose to entertain this revision. The revision therefore fails and it is accordingly dismissed. The petitioner is entitled to move the trial Court seeking rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of C.P.C., . If such

¶19

2/4

¶20

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

¶21

CRP (PD) No.2642 of 2021

¶22

application is filed by the petitioner, the trial Court is directed to dispose of

¶23

the application as expeditiously as possible. No costs. Consequently,

¶24

connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶25

01.12.2021

¶26

vum Index: Yes/No Speaking order / Non speaking order

¶27

To:

¶28

The Additional District Munsif, Poonamalle.

¶29

The Section Officer, VR Section, Madras High Court, Chennai.

¶30

3/4

¶31

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

¶32

CRP (PD) No.2642 of 2021

¶33

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.

¶34

vum

¶35

CRP (PD) No.2642 of 2021 and CMP No.19564 of 2021

¶36

01.12.2021

¶37

4/4

¶38

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

S.Velu v. K.Rajavel

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Velu v. K.Rajavel

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.Divyabharathi Vs Arun Narayanan

M.P.Poornima Vs K.Muilmurugan

Thiripura Sundari Vs M.Chandrasekaran

Angamuthu Vs Dhandapani

D.Shanmugam Vs P.Anbalagan

N.P.K.R.Ramasamy Co-Operative Sugar Mills Ltd, Vs Binny Engineering Ltd.