The Madurai Bench dismissed a civil miscellaneous appeal challenging a remand order due to the death of primary parties and prior dismissal of claims against other respondents.
The appeal was dismissed as the primary respondents were dead and other respondents had been previously dismissed.
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.M.A.(MD)No.1420 of 2008
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 16.02.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
C.M.A.(MD)No.1420 of 2008 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2008
1.Rasul Khan 2.N.Mohamed Ariff ... Appellants/Respondents 1&2/ Plaintiffs 1&3
Vs.
1.M.A.S.E.Khadar Basha 2.Syed Ismail 3.Rowther Nainar 4.Mohammed Ali 5.A.M.S.Abdul Razak 6.S.A.N.K.Umar 7.Sandi Jinnah 8.Mohammed Hussain 9.K.S.K.Mohammed Ali 10.S.M.K.Mohammed Ali Jinnah 11.M.E.S.Ammer Khan 12.Anwar Baig 13.K.O.M.K.Peroz Khan 14.The District Registrar, Sivagangai District. 15.The Chief Educational Officer, Collectorate Complex, M.P.Nagar, Sivagangai District. 16.The District Educational Officer, Collectorate Complex, M.P.Nagar, Sivagangai District. 17.Jaffar 18.Jaluludeen ... Respondents 11 to 18/ Respondents 3 to 10/ Defendants 3,10,14 to 17, 20 & 21
1/3
C.M.A.(MD)No.1420 of 2008
Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Order 43 Rule 1(na) R/w Section 104 of C.P.C., to set aside the judgment and decree dated 30.06.2008 passed in A.S.No.71 of 2006 on the file of the Sub-Court, Sivagangai, remanding the suit in O.S.No.50 of 2000 judgment and decree dated 06.06.2006 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Ilayangudi, for fresh trial.
For Appellants : Mr.Mohammed Ibrahim Saibu for M/s.Ajmal Associates For R1 : Mr.D.Senthil For R14 to 16 : Mr.D.Gandhiraj Special Government Pleader
For R2,R3,R4, F6, R7, R17 & R18 : No appearance For R5, R8 to R13 : Dismissed
JUDGMENT
Mr.D.Senthil, learned counsel appearing for the first respondent would submit that the first respondent and the first appellant are dead. This appeal has also been dismissed as against the respondents 5, 8 to 13, even as early as on 21.06.2017. The appeal being one against the order of remand it, cannot be prosecuted against the other respondents only. Hence, this appeal is dismissed.
Assistant Registrar (CS-III)
// True Copy //
/ /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)
Ns
To
2/3
C.M.A.(MD)No.1420 of 2008
4.The Chief Educational Officer, Collectorate Complex, M.P.Nagar, Sivagangai District. 5.The District Educational Officer, Collectorate Complex, M.P.Nagar, Sivagangai District.
COPY TO: The Record Keeper, V.R. Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. (2 COPIES)
+1. CC to M/S.D.SENTHIL Advocate SR.No.6649
C.M.A.(MD)No.1420 of 2008 16.02.2022
RD(28.04.2022) 3P 9C
3/3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the civil miscellaneous appeal challenging an order of remand is maintainable when the primary parties to the original suit are deceased and other respondents were previously dismissed.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Rasul Khan
N.Mohamed Ariff
M.A.S.E.Khadar Basha
The District Registrar, Sivagangai District
The Chief Educational Officer, Collectorate Complex, M.P.Nagar, Sivagangai District
The District Educational Officer, Collectorate Complex, M.P.Nagar, Sivagangai District
R.Subramanian
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
