Ramar v. Vasanthi
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court allowed a civil revision petition to set aside a trial court order dismissing a petition to set aside an ex parte decree. The court granted the petitioner one more opportunity to defend, conditioning it on an immediate payment of costs.
What did the court decide?
The order dismissing the petition to set aside ex parte decree is set aside on condition that petitioner pays Rs. 7,500 to respondents within two weeks.
What the court decided
C.R.P.(P.D).No.3809 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 03.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
C.R.P.(P.D).No.3809 of 2016
and C.M.P.No.19473 of 2016
Ramar ...Petitioner
Vs
1.Vasanthi
2.Palaniammal
3.Vijaya
4.Santhi
5.Venkatesan
6.Srinivasan
7.Padmavathi ...Respondents
Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Indian Constitution of India to set aside the fair and decretal order passed in I.A.No.350 of 2013 in O.S.No.21 of 2008 dated 12.06.2015 on the file of the learned Sub-Judge, Kallakurichi.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Suresh For Respondents : Mr.P.Valliappan for R1 to R5 for R6&R7-notice served-NA O R D E R
This Civil Revision Petition is directed as against the fair and
decretal order passed in I.A.No.350 of 2013 in O.S.No.21 of 2008 dated 12.06.2015 on the file of the learned Sub-Judge, Kallakurichi, thereby
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to condone the delay and set aside the ex parte decree in a partition suit.
Whether the trial court's order dismissing the delay condonation petition should be modified.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Ramar
- respondent
Vasanthi
- respondent
Palaniammal
- respondent
Vijaya
- respondent
Santhi
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court