A.Murugesan v. Vasugi
Case brief
What is this about?
Two civil revision petitions filed under Article 226 to set aside district judge order dismissing foster maintenance petitions were dismissed for non-prosecution as the petitioner did not appear on the hearing date.
What the court decided
CRP Nos.392 & 393 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.01.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
C.R.P. Nos.392 & 393 of 2019
and
C.M.P.Nos. 2688 & 2691 of 2019
A.Murugesan .... Petitioner in both CRPs Vs Vasugi .... Respondent in CRP No.392 of 2019 Babuji .... Respondent in CRP No.393 of 2019
Prayer in CRP No.392 of 2019 : Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the docket order of allowing the reopen petition in E.A.No.14 of 2018 in E.P.No.4 of 2015 in O.S.No.2 of 2002 dated 25.09.2018 passed by the learned II Additional District Judge, Chidambaram.
Prayer in CRP No.393 of 2019 : Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the docket order of allowing the reopen petition in E.A.No.16 of 2018 in E.P.No.3 of 2015 in O.S.No.3 of 2002 dated 25.09.2018 passed by the learned II Additional District Judge, Chidambaram.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
A.Murugesan
- respondent
Vasugi
- respondent
Babuji
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court