The High Court at Madras dismissed a civil suit for damages and permanent injunction filed by P. Rajarajan against Karunakaran. The plaintiff failed to appear or record evidence despite multiple adjournments due to being abroad.
The suit was dismissed with exemplary costs to be taxed by the court.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
(ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION)
WEDNESDAY, THE 16th DAY OF MARCH 2022
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
C.S. No.538 of 2019
Mr.P.Rajarajan, Son of Mr.Palanirajan No.17/21, Padmanabha Street, Darmapuram, T.Nagar, Chennai 600 017
......Plaintiff
Vs
Mr.Karunakaran S/o.Poomalai No.9/16, Semmallai Thottam Nillavarapatti(PO), Salem.
......Defendant
Civil Suit praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass a judgement and Decree
(a) Directing the Defendant to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,00,100/- (Rupees
One Crore and One hundred Only) to the Plaintiff towards damages together with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of the plaint till date of realization.
(b) of Permanent Injunction restraining the Defendant, his men, agents or servants or any person claiming under the Defendant from in any manner making and spreading any false, libelous,
slanderous and defamatory allegations against the plaintiff and
2
publishing the same in any magazines, Newspapers or any media of any kind.
(c) For costs of the suit
This civil suit coming on this day before this court for hearing in the presence of Mr. T.Sundar Rajan, Advocate for the plaintiff herein and Mr.S.Nagarajan, Advocate for the defendant herein and upon reading the pleadings filed herein and the learned counsel for the plaintiff having submitted that the plaintiff is at singapore and there is no response from the plaintiff and in view of the endorsement made by the learned Master, it is ordered as follows:-
That the suit in C.S.No.538 of 2019 be and is hereby dismissed.
exemplary costs of this suit, and as and when taxed by the taxing officer of this court and noted in the margin thereof.
WITNESS THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI, CHIEF JUSTICE, HIGH COURT AT MADRAS AFORESAID, THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH 2022.
Sd/ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (O.S.I) //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2022.
COURT OFFICER(O.S.) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.
3
SR
23.03.2022
C.S. No.538 of 2019
ORDER
DATED:16.03.2022
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
FOR APPROVAL: 31.03.2022
APPROVED ON: 01.04.2022
4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 16.03.2022
Coram: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
C.S.No.538 of 2019
P.Rajarajan
... Plaintiff
vs
Karunakaran ... Defendant
Civil Suit filed under Order IV Rule 1 of Original Side Rules R/w
Order VII Rules 1 & 2 of CPC seeking for the following reliefs:
(a) directing the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,00,100/- to the
Plaintiff towards damages together with interest at the rate of 18% per anum from the date of the plaint till date of realization;
(b) of Permanent Injunction restraining the Defendant, his men,
agents or servants or any person claimingunder the Defendant from in any https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ manner making and spreading any false, libelous, slanderous and
5
defamatory allegations against the Plaintiff and publishing the same in any
magazines, Newspapers or any media of any kind;
(c) for cost of the suit.
For Plaintiff : Mr.T.Sundar Rajan
For Defendants : Mr.S.Nagarajan
J UDGMENT
Earlier the matter was refer to the learned Master for recording evidence. Before the learned Master, the learned counsel for the plaintiff represented that the plaintiff is at Singapore and sought time for his appearance for recording evidence. Though several opportunities were given, the plaintiff has not entered appearance, even for single hearing and has also not come forward to lead oral evidence and mark documents. After
spending considerable time, the learned Master with no other option, on 14.03.2022 referred the matter before this Court for further orders.
plaintiff is at Singapore and there is no response from the plaintiff.
6
submission made by the learned counsel for the plaintiff, this CS is dismissed with exemplary costs.
Sd/-P.V.J. 16.03.2022
//Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2022.
COURT OFFICER(O.S.)
From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to proceed with the suit given the plaintiff's absence and failure to record evidence.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
P. Velmurugan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
