Allowed

N.Ravichandran v. Manonmani

Madras HC20 Sept 2022CMP/10808/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court condoned a delay of 1355 days in restoring a Civil Revision Petition pending judgment. Granted on condition of payment of costs to opposing counsel, citing COVID-19 disruption and the substantive nature of the underlying Will dispute requiring adjudication.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of delay of 1355 days in restoring C.R.P. No. 1199 of 2017 on condition of payment of costs of Rs. 2500/- to opponent.

N.Ravichandran Vs Manonmani — Partition | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

C.M.P. No. 10808 of 2022 in

¶2

C.M.P. No. 10808 of 2022 in C.R.P. No. 1199 of 2017

¶3

C.R.P.No.1199 of 2017

¶4

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

¶5

This Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed to condone the delay

¶6

of 1355 days in preferring the above petition to restore the C.R.P. (PD) No.

¶7

1199 of 2017, which was dismissed on 16.07.2018.

¶8

Today, when the matter taken up for hearing, both learned counsel

¶9

for petitioner and the learned counsel for respondent appeared.

¶10

The Revision Petitioner is the plaintiff in the suit in O.S.No. 9 of 2012 on the file of District Munsif, Rasipuram against the defendants for the relief of partition and separate possession. During the pendency of the suit proceedings, he has filed an application to send the document for forensic lab, more particularly, the disputed Will. For that, they have filed an application in I.A.No.896 of 2014 and the said application was dismissed by

¶11

1/4

¶12

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

¶13

C.M.P. No. 10808 of 2022 in C.R.P. No. 1199 of 2017

¶14

the trial court on merits. Challenging the said order, he preferred the Civil Revision Petition in C.R.P.No. 1199 of 2017. During the pendency of Revision Petition, the suit was dismissed for default on 06.12.2017 and accordingly, the above Revision Petition was also dismissed on 16.07.2018 on the ground that the suit itself was dismissed and nothing survives in the Revision Petition.

¶15

The learned counsel for petitioner would further submit that subsequently, he filed application in I.A.No.523 of 2018 under Order 9 Rule 9 of C.P.C. to restore the suit and the same was allowed on 01.03.2022. Thereafter, he has taken steps to restore the C.R.P., but there is a delay of 1355 days in filing the petition. The reasons assigned by the petitioner is that the delay in getting copy application during the Covid pandemic period. As per the affidavit, the copy application was made ready only on 15.03.2022. Thereafter, he filed this petition.

¶16

2/4

¶17

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

¶18

C.M.P. No. 10808 of 2022 in C.R.P. No. 1199 of 2017

¶19

Admittedly, for the past two years, due to covid, the proceedings of

¶20

the courts are stopped and furthermore, the dispute between parties is with

¶21

regard to the Will. So, adjudication must be proceeded in the Revision Petition. Therefore, in order to give a fair chance and to adjudicate the Revision Petition, this Court is inclined to allow this petition on condition that the petitioner shall pay a cost of Rs.2500/- payable to the learned counsel for contesting respondents on or before 29.09.2022.

¶22

Post the matter for reporting compliance on 30.09.2022.

20.09.2022

rpp

3/4

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

¶27

C.M.P. No. 10808 of 2022 in C.R.P. No. 1199 of 2017

¶28

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

¶29

rpp

¶30

C.M.P.No.10808 of 2022

¶31

in C.R.P.No.1199 of 2017

¶32

20.09.2022

¶33

4/4

¶34

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

N.Ravichandran v. Manonmani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Ravichandran v. Manonmani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Angamuthu Vs Dhandapani

M.P. Nagarajan Vs G. Kandasamy

The General Public of Vs M/S.Adroit Trades Pvt. Ltd.

The District Collector Vs Pakkiriammal

D.Subathra Devi Vs S.Padmavathi

A.Mohan Raj Vs R.Ramanjujam Died