Allowed

Jeyaraman v. Murugesan

Madras HC23 Jan 2023CMP/20658/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allowed miscellaneous petitions to include the legal heirs and wife of the deceased 1st respondent as new respondents. The court permitted the amendment of respondent names and directed registry to correct the cause title, scheduling the main appeal for final hearing.

What did the court decide?

Allowed petitions to add legal heirs and wife of deceased as respondents; ordered registry to amend cause titles.

Jeyaraman Vs Murugesan — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

C.M.P.Nos.20658 of 2022, 1291 & 1294 of 2023 in A.S.No.299 of 2013 and C.M.P.No.1290 of 2023 in C.M.P.No.20658 of 2022 in A.S.No.299 of 2013

¶2

C.M.P.Nos.20658 of 2022, 1291 & 1294 of 2023 in A.S.No.299 of 2013 and C.M.P.No.1290 of 2023 in C.M.P.No.20658 of 2022 in A.S.No.299 of 2013

¶3

S.S.SUNDAR, J., and A.A.NAKKIRAN, J.,

¶4

[Order of the Court was made by S.S.SUNDAR, J .,]

¶5

(1)The above miscellaneous petitions have been filed to bring on record the

¶6

legal heirs of deceased 1^st respondent as detailed hereunder and rank them as respondents 7 and 8; to set aside the abatement occasioned because of the death of 1^st respondent in the appeal; to bring on record the wife of deceased 1^st respondent as detailed hereunder and rank her as respondent No.9 and to permit the petitioners to amend the names of respondents No.7 and 8 in A.S.No.299 of 2013.

¶7

(2)Mr.V.K.Vijayaraghavan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners

¶8

stated that Mr.N.Manokaran, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has filed Change of Vakalat for respondents 7 and 8. Since the names of respondents 7 and 8 are different in C.M.P.No.20658 of 2022, the Vakalat came to be returned.

¶9

1/3

¶10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶11

C.M.P.Nos.20658 of 2022, 1291 & 1294 of 2023 in A.S.No.299 of 2013 and C.M.P.No.1290 of 2023 in C.M.P.No.20658 of 2022 in A.S.No.299 of 2013

¶12

(3)Though Vakalat is returned, it is stated that Mr.N.Manokaran, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 to 6 takes notice for respondents 7 to 9 who are children and wife of the deceased 1^st respondent. Applications are not opposed.

¶13

(4)Being satisfied with the reasons stated in the affidavit, this Court is inclined to allow all the above miscellaneous petitions.

¶14

(5)Hence, C.M.P.Nos.20658 of 2022, 1291 & 1294 of 2023 and C.M.P.No.1290 of 2023 in C.M.P.No.20658 of 2022 in A.S.No.299 of 2013 are ordered.

¶15

(6)Registry is directed to carry out necessary amendments in the cause title.

¶16

(7)Post the appeal for final hearing on 02.02.2023.

¶17

[SSSRJ] [AANJ] 23.01.2023

¶18

cda

¶19

2/3

¶20

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶21

C.M.P.Nos.20658 of 2022, 1291 & 1294 of 2023 in A.S.No.299 of 2013 and C.M.P.No.1290 of 2023 in C.M.P.No.20658 of 2022 in A.S.No.299 of 2013

¶22

S.S.SUNDAR, J.,

¶23

AND A.A.NAKKIRAN, J., cda

¶24

C.M.P.Nos.20658 of 2022, 1291 & 1294 of 2023 in A.S.No.299 of 2013 and C.M.P.No.1290 of 2023 in C.M.P.No.20658 of 2022 in A.S.No.299 of 2013

¶25

23.01.2023

¶26

3/3

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Jeyaraman v. Murugesan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeyaraman v. Murugesan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

E.Kothandapani Vs The Secretary to Government of Tamil nadu

Mohammed Ghouse,S/O.Ismail Vs M.Kaliyamurthy

D.Sriraman (Died) Vs Tamizhselvi W/O.a Thangavelu

K.Phanidhar Vs P.Sarasagopal

E.Janarthanan Vs Kalaiselvi@Tamilselvy

Chennai Metropolitan Water Vs M/S Chennai Water