Allowed

S.Uma v. M.Logeswari

Madras HC9 Nov 2023CRP/3964/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras allowed a civil revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The court set aside an impugned order of the Principal District Judge, Chengalpattu, which attached suit property without affording the defendants sufficient opportunity to furnish security.

What did the court decide?

The order passed in I.A. No. 2 of 2022 is set aside and the Civil Revision Petition is allowed.

S.Uma Vs M.Logeswari — Execution and Attachment | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

C.R.P. No.3964 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 09.11.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

¶6

C.R.P.No.3964 of 2023 and CMP.No.24348 of 2023

¶7

1.Uma

¶8

2.Narasinga Rao 3.Sharini 4.Sharanth

¶9

5.Sulochana ... Petitioners

Versus

M.Logeswari

... Respondent

PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, praying to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 28.11.2022,

¶14

in I.A.No.2 of 2022 in O.S.No.151 of 2022 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Kancheepuram, Chengalpattu.

¶15

For Petitioners : Mr. J. Ravikumar For Respondent : Mr. K.Mani

¶16

1/4

¶17

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

¶18

C.R.P. No.3964 of 2023

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

The petitioners have filed this petition to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 28.11.2022, in I.A.No.2 of 2022 in O.S.No.151 of 2022 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Kancheepuram, Chengalpattu.

¶21

2. Before the trial Court the plaintiff has filed an I.A.No.2 of 2022 in O.S.No.151 of 2022, praying for attachment of suit property. Objection was also made by the defendants. On hearing both sides, the learned trial Judge erroneously passed an order directing to attach the property, without giving sufficient opportunity to furnish the security. Challenging the said order, the respondent has preferred this revision. Subsequently the plaintiff has filed another I.A.No.3 of 2022 praying for a direction to the defendant to furnish security for the same suit claim, failing which, order for attachment. Thereafter, on the objection raised by the defendants, the plaintiff has filed the application in I.A.No.3 of 2022 with correct prayer.

¶22

2/4

¶23

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

¶24

C.R.P. No.3964 of 2023

¶25

Therefore, the order passed by the learned trial Judge in I.A.No.2 of

¶26

2022 is hereby set aside.

¶27

Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.

¶28

09.11.2023

¶29

Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation: Yes / No Speaking/Non-speaking order rri

¶30

The Principal District Judge, Kancheepuram, Chengalpattu.

¶31

The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court of Madras.

¶32

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

¶33

3/4

¶34

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

¶35

C.R.P. No.3964 of 2023

¶36

rri

¶37

C.R.P. No.3964 of 2023

¶38

and CMP.No.24348 of 2023

¶39

09.11.2023

¶40

4/4

¶41

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

S.Uma v. M.Logeswari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Uma v. M.Logeswari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Usharani Vs Srinivasalu Naidu

Kaliammal Vs Indirani

E.Venkatesan Vs v.Sowmiya

V.Indhirani Vs a.Rajammal

Shanmugham Vs Ayyasamy

S.Karthika Vs K.Karthik