The Madras High Court dismissed a civil revision petition against an appellate order condoning substantial delay in filing an appeal due to the Pandemic. The Court found no error in the lower court's application of the Supreme Court's direction excluding the pandemic period.
Civil revision petition stands dismissed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition closed.
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(MD)No.1412 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 13.07.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
CRP(MD)No.1412 of 2022 and CMP(MD)No.5861 of 2022
1.Subbaiah
2.Palanisamy
3.Ramraj : Petitioners
Vs.
1.Subburaj
5.Vengatesh : Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to call for the records in connection with the fair and decreetal order dated 23.04.2022 in I.A.No.1 of 2021 in unnumbered A.S.No. of 2021 on the file of the Principal District Court, Theni.
For Petitioners : Mr.B.Rajesh Saravanan *****
1/5
CRP(MD)No.1412 of 2022
ORDER
This revision petition is filed as against the orders passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Theni, in I.A.No.1 of 2021 in unnumbered A.S.No. of 2021, dated 23.04.2022.
2.The respondents have preferred an appeal as against the judgment and decree passed by the Sub Court,
Periyakulam, in O.S.No.38 of 2009, before the District Court, Theni, however with delay. Along with the appeal petition, they have filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act in I.A.No.1 of 2021. The Appellate Court condoned the delay in filing the appeal and aggrieved over the same, the petitioners have moved the instant revision petition.
3.Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the judgment and decree in O.S.No.38 of 2009 was passed on 22.11.2019 and the period of limitation expired on 07.03.2020. The respondents have preferred the appeal only on 28.09.2021, with a delay of 564 days. But, the Appellate Court, by misinterpreting the decision of the Hon'ble 2/5
CRP(MD)No.1412 of 2022
Supreme Court in Miscellaneous Application No.665 of 2021 in
SMW(C) No. 3 of 2020, In Re: Cognizance for Extension of
Limitation , has held that there is a delay of four days in filing the appeal and condoned the delay.
Extension of Limitation , has held the period from 15.03.2020 till 02.10.2021 shall stand excluded, while calculating the period of limitation, due to the Covid-19 pandemic. In the case on hand, admittedly, the period of limitation expired on 07.03.2020 and the respondents preferred the appeal on 28.09.2021. If the period between 15.03.2020 and 28.09.2021
is excluded, there is a delay of four days in preferring the appeal, which was condoned by the Appellate Court on appreciation of the reasons stated therein.
5.This Court does not find any error in the orders of
the Appellate Court. Accordingly, this civil revision petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
3/5
CRP(MD)No.1412 of 2022 Index : Yes / No 13.07.2022 Internet : Yes gk B.PUGALENDHI, J. gk To The Principal District Judge, Theni.
B.PUGALENDHI, J. gk
CRP(MD)No.1412 of 2022
4/5
CRP(MD)No.1412 of 2022
13.07.2022
5/5
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the limits of the District Court were exceeded in condoning the delay in filing the appeal and whether the revision petition should be allowed.
How the period of limitation regarding Covid-19 pandemic affects the calculation of delay in filing an appeal.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
SMW(C) No. 3 of 2020Applied¶30
Miscellaneous Application No.665 of 2021 in SMW(C) No. 3 of 2020, In Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation
2 provisions across 2 enactments
1. Subbaiah 2. Palanisamy 3. Ramraj
1. Subburaj - 2. Saraswathi - 3. Latha Senthilkumar - 4. Senthilkumar 5. Vengatesh
B. Pugalandhi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
B. Pugalandhi
Parties & counsel
