Dismissed

Juleka Bi a Majanbi v. M.Abdul Munaf

Madras HC11 Feb 2021CRP/3999/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras dismissed a Civil Revision Petition challenging an order allowing amendment of a prayer for declaration. The Court found no irregularity as limitation on amendment cannot be considered at that stage but directed the trial court to decide the suit on merits regarding limitation.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petition dismissed; trial Court directed to frame issue on limitation and decide suit on merits.

Juleka Bi a Majanbi Vs M.Abdul Munaf — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

CRP.PD.No.3999 of 2017

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 11.02.2021

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

CRP.PD.No.3999 of 2017 and

¶7

CMP.No.18705 of 2017
1.Juleka Bi @ Majanbi
2. Fatheema Bi ..Petitioners
Vs.
1. M.Abdul Munaf
2. A.Afroz
3. A.Sabiha Banu
4. A.Shabena
5. A.Reshma
6. A.Firoz
7. Syed Ibrahim
8. P.Kamar
9. Dr.S.Shanmuga Vadivu
10. Subiya Bi ..Respondents

¶8

PRAYER: The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to set aside the order and decretal order dated 22.09.2017 made in I.A.No.279 of 2016 in O.S.No.10 of 2012 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Hosur, by allowing this Civil Revision Petition.

¶9

For Petitioners : Mr.T.Dhanasekaran For Respondents : Mr.V.Raghavachari (for R1 to R6) : No Appearance (for R7 to R10)

¶10

1/4

¶11

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

¶12

CRP.PD.No.3999 of 2017

¶13

ORDER

¶14

This Civil Revision Petition is directed as against the order and decretal order passed in I.A.No.279 of 2016 in O.S.No.10 of 2012 dated 22.09.2017 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Hosur.

¶15

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are the defendants 3 and 4 in the suit filed by the respondents 1 to 6 herein for permanent injunction. Immediately, after filing the suit, the petitioners filed their written statement, thereby, denying the very tittle over the suit property. Even then, the respondents 1 to 6 failed to come forward with the petition for amendment to amend the prayer for declaration in respect of the suit property. Only in the year 2016, they filed a petition for amendment to include the prayer for declaration in respect of the suit property.

¶16

Without considering the limitation as provided Article 58 of the Limitation Act, the Court below mechanically allowed the petition. This Court as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India repeatedly held that the limitation cannot be taken into account at the time of allowing the petition

¶17

2/4

¶18

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

¶19

CRP.PD.No.3999 of 2017

¶20

for amendment to the prayer of declaration and it can be considered at the time of deciding the suit. Therefore, this Court finds no irregularity or infirmity in the order passed by the Court below.

¶21

Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. However,

¶22

the trial Court is directed to frame the issue, in respect of the limitation and
decide the suit on merits in accordance with law. Consequently, the
connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.
11.02.2021
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
kv
To
The Additional District Judge, Hosur.

¶23

3/4

¶24

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

¶25

CRP.PD.No.3999 of 2017

¶26

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN,J.

¶27

¶28

CRP.PD.No.3999 of 2017

¶29

11.02.2021

¶30

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

¶31

4/4

Juleka Bi a Majanbi v. M.Abdul Munaf

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Juleka Bi a Majanbi v. M.Abdul Munaf

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

State of Tn., Vs T.Mohammed Hussain

Malarvizhi Vs Sampoornam (Died)

M. Tamilselvi Vs G. Sivamani

Chakrapani Mudaliar Vs Mallika Ammal

S.Meganathan Vs B.Srinivasan

S. Palaniyammal Vs M. Venkatesan