The 1st respondent/plaintiff submitted readiness to pay court fee. The Madras High Court held that nothing remained for consideration and dismissed the Civil Revision Petition as infructuous, consequentialy closing the connected miscellaneous petition.
Civil Revision Petition dismissed as infructuous; connected miscellaneous petition closed. No costs.
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.
C.R.P.(MD) No.125 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 20.12.2021
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA
C.R.P.(MD) No.125 of 2020 and C.M.P.(MD) No.711 of 2020
S.Sivakumar ... Petitioner/1st Respondent/1st Defendant
vs. 1.S.Sethumadhavan ... 1st Respondent/Petitioner/Plaintiff 2.Sivasubramanian ...2nd Respondents/2nd Respondent/2nd Defendant
PRAYER:- This Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal order passed by the Sub Court, Lalgudi in Indigent Original Petition No.6 of 2018 dated 23.09.2019.
For Petitioner : Mr.Porkodi Karnan for M/S.Polex Legal Solutions For R1 : Mr.R.Sundar
ORDER
It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent/plaintiff that the 1st respondent is ready to pay the Court fee as directed.
2.In view of the above, nothing survives for further consideration in the above Civil Revision Petition and accordingly, it stands dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Assistant Registrar (AS)
// True Copy //
/ /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)
mm
1/2
C.R.P.(MD) No.125 of 2020
To
The Subordinate Judge,
Lalgudi, Tiruchirappalli
+1 CC to M/s.POLAX LEGAL SOLUTION, Advocate ( SR-39874[F] dated 21/12/2021 )
C.R.P.(MD) No.125 of 2020
20.12.2021
NSN(CO) KB(07.01.2022) 2P 3C
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 should be dismissed as the petitioner failed to seek any relief.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
S.Sivakumar
S.Sethumadhavan
Sivasubramanian
P.T.ASHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
