High Court dismissed two civil revision petitions for non-prosecution as the petitioner was absent despite notices. The respondent counsel argued they were not maintainable due to the availability of appeal remedies.
Civil Revision Petitions dismissed for non-prosecution. 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.
CRP(NPD)(MD)Nos.1316 and 1317 of 2015
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 27.07.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
CRP(NPD)(MD)Nos.1316 and 1317 of 2015
J.P.Samraj ... Petitioner in both CRPs.
versus
G.Jothish Kumar
... Respondent in both CRPs.
Prayer in CRP(NPD)(MD)No.1316 of 2015: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the Judgment and decree dated 06.11.2013 passed in O.S.No.64 of 2012 on the file of the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli.
Prayer in CRP(NPD)(MD)No.1317 of 2015: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the fair and decreetal order dated 06.11.2013 passed in Memo in O.S.No.64 of 2012 on the file of the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli.
1/6
CRP(NPD)(MD)Nos.1316 and 1317 of 2015
For Petitioner in both CRPs. : No appearance For Respondent : Mr.H.Arumugam in both CRPs. for Mr.S.Kannan
COMMON ORDER
The Civil Revision Petitions are listed today under the caption
“For Dismissal” as there was no representation for the petitioner on 12.07.2022. Even today, there is no representation for the petitioner.
both the Civil Revision Petitions are not maintainable as they have been filed against the Judgment and Decree dated 06.11.2013 passed in O.S.No.64 of 2012 and also against the order dated 06.11.2013 passed in Memo in O.S.No.64 of 2012. The remedy available for the petitioner is only before the Appellate Forum and not before this Court by way of filing this Civil Revision Petition. On this ground, the Civil Revision Petitions are liable to be dismissed. He further submits that
2/6
CRP(NPD)(MD)Nos.1316 and 1317 of 2015
the petitioner has filed these civil revision petitions with an intention to
drag on the proceedings.
“11. Secondly, the High Court ought to have seen that when a remedy of appeal under Section 104(1)(i) read with Order 43, Rule 1(r) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, was directly available, Respondents 1 and 2 ought to have taken recourse to the same. It is true that the availability of a remedy of appeal may not always be a bar for the exercise of supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court. In A.Venkatasubbiah Naidu v. S.Chellappan, this Court held that “though no hurdle can be put against the exercise of the constitutional powers of the High Court, it is a wellrecognised principle which gained judicial recognition that the High Court should direct the party to avail
3/6
CRP(NPD)(MD)Nos.1316 and 1317 of 2015
himself of such remedies before he resorts to a constitutional remedy”.
4/6
CRP(NPD)(MD)Nos.1316 and 1317 of 2015
there was no representation for the petitioner on 12.07.2022. Therefore, this Court directed the matters to be listed today under the caption “For Dismissal”. Even today, there is no representation for the petitioner.
27.07.2022
Index : Yes / No. Internet: Yes / No. ogy
5/6
CRP(NPD)(MD)Nos.1316 and 1317 of 2015
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
ogy
CRP(NPD)(MD)Nos.1316 and 1317 of 2015
27.07.2022
6/6
1 issue framed by the court
Whether civil revision petitions filed against lower court orders are maintainable when the remedy of appeal is available.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Devinarayan Housing and Property Development (P) Ltd., ChennaiReferred¶27
(2006) 4 MLJ 1626 (Devinarayan Housing and Property Development (P) Ltd., Chennai)
A.Venkatasubbiah Naidu v. S.ChellappanReferred¶28
J.P.Samraj
G.Jothish Kumar
B.Pugalendhi
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
