Allowed

Uma Maheswari v. R.Asokan(Died)

Madras HC19 Jan 2022CRP/1537/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

, The Hon'ble Madras High Court allowed the civil revision petition filed under Article 226. The court directed the Rent Controller at Coimbatore to dispose of the pending RCOP. No.232 of 2017 and all related applications within six months due to the case being stuck for over five years.

What did the court decide?

Direct the Rent Controller to dispose of RCOP.No.232 of 2017 within six months.

Uma Maheswari Vs R.Asokan(Died) — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

C.R.P(PD)No.1537 of 2020

¶2

and CMP.No.9203 of 2020

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶4

DATED: 19.01.2022

¶5

CORAM:

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

¶7

C.R.P(PD)No.1537 of 2020 and CMP.No.9203 of 2020

1.Uma Maheswari

2.R.Varun

..Petitioners

Vs.

1.Dr.R.Asokan (died)

2.Madhavi

3.A.Kumaran

4.A.Venthan

(R2 to R4 brought on record LRs' of the deceased sole Respondent Viz., R.Asokan vide Court order dated 08.09.2021 made in CMP.No.5893 of 2021 in CRP(PD).No.1537 of 2020) ..Respondent Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to direct the in-charge Judge, the II-Additional District Munsif (Rent Controller), Coimbatore to dispose of the RCOP.No.232 of 2017 pending on the file of the I-Additional District Munsif (Rent Controller), Coimbatore within a time frame.

¶17

1/4

¶18

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

¶19

C.R.P(PD)No.1537 of 2020

¶20

and CMP.No.9203 of 2020

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.C.R.Prasannan

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

Considering the limited prayer sought for in the revision, notice to

¶24

the respondents is deemed unnecessary. The 1^st respondent died and his legal representatives have already been brought on record vide order dated 08.09.2021 made in CMP.No.5893 of 2021.

¶25

2.Mr.C.R.Prasannan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners

¶26

would submit that the legal heirs of the 1^st respondent, who also figures as a respondent in RCOP.No.232 of 2017 have been brought on record in the

¶27

said RCOP. The said statement of the learned counsel is recorded.

¶28

3.It is seen from the papers produced along with the revision that

¶29

the Rent Control Original Proceeding of the year 2017 is pending for more than five years now. It is also stated that the orders passed in IA.No.306 of 2017, an application filed under Section 11 have also not been properly complied with.

¶30

2/4

¶31

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

¶32

C.R.P(PD)No.1537 of 2020 and CMP.No.9203 of 2020

¶33

4.Considering the circumstances, this civil revision petition is allowed, there will be a direction to the Rent Controller / the I-Additional District Munsif, Coimbatore to dispose of RCOP.No.232 of 2017 along with all pending applications within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶34

19.01.2022

¶35

kkn

¶36

Index:No Internet:Yes Speaking

¶37

ToThe Rent Controller, I-Additional District Munsif Court, Coimbatore.

¶38

3/4

¶39

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

¶40

C.R.P(PD)No.1537 of 2020

¶41

and CMP.No.9203 of 2020

¶42

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.

¶43

KKN

¶44

C.R.P(PD)No.1537 of 2020 and CMP.No.9203 of 2020

¶45

19.01.2022

¶46

4/4

¶47

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

Uma Maheswari v. R.Asokan(Died)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uma Maheswari v. R.Asokan(Died)

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

Mr.Sivanaiya Vs K. Selvarani

Amalameri Vs Gnanamani

C.Kuppana Gounder (Died) Vs C. Nanjappa Gounder (Died)

Praveen Kumar A.S. Vs Sumiko Sherlin

Tasmac Ltd., Vs K. Venkataraj

K.Ramasamy Vs N.Shankar