Pongiyammal v. v.Kamalam
Case brief
What is this about?
Court recalled a dismissal of a civil revision petition as infructuous because counsel inadvertently referred to the petition as expired. The matter was restored on merits for hearing on 25.01.2023.
What did the court decide?
Earlier order dismissing C.R.P. No. 2890 of 2017 as infructuous is recalled; petition posted for hearing on 25.01.2023.
What the court decided
CMP.No.10607 of 2022 in CRP.No.2890 of 2017
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
Due to inadvertence, the learned counsel for the petitioner had submitted earlier that nothing survives in the civil revision petition and on that submission, this Court dismissed the civil revision petition as infructuous.
- Now, both the counsel submitted that the civil revision petition is very much alive and they want to argue the case on merits.
- In view of the above submission, this petition is allowed and the order passed in CRP.No.2890 of 2017 on 31.03.2021 is hereby recalled. Accordingly, the Registry is directed to post the civil revision petition in CRP.No.2890 of 2017 for final hearing on 25.01.2023.
10.01.2023
lok
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the civil revision petition, previously dismissed as infructuous, is to be restored for hearing on merits upon counsel's representation.
Coram
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court