Mahalingam v. Muthusamy
Case brief
What is this about?
This judgment dismisses a Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of the CPC for non-prosecution as the petitioner failed to appear on the hearing date after seeking an adjournment late in the process, despite the 2020 filing age.
What did the court decide?
Dismissal of the Civil Revision Petition for non-prosecution. Connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
What the court decided
C.R.P.No.308 of 2020 and C.M.P.No.1589 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 13.09.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA
C.R.P.No.308 of 2020 and
C.M.P.No.1589 of 2020
1.Mahalingam 2.Balamurugan 3.Bakkiyaraj
4.Thangamalar
5.Theerthavalli
... Petitioners
..Vs..
Muthusamy ... Respondent
PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of C.P.C., against the fair and decreetal order dated 17.10.2019 made in I.A.No.737 of 2018 in O.S.No.246 of 2014 on the file of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Ariyalur.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to grant adjournment to the revision petitioner proceeding with non-prosecution.
Whether the civil revision petition lacks prosecution is a ground for dismissal.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Mahalingam
- petitioner
Balamurugan
- petitioner
Bakkiyaraj
- petitioner
Thangamalar
- petitioner
Theerthavalli
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court