Allowed

Kamala v. K.Periyasamy

Madras HC22 Dec 2023CRP/4824/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed two civil revision petitions and closed a connected miscellaneous petition. Setting aside the trial court's orders dismissing applications to recall evidence, the Court granted the petitioner liberty to cross-examine her husband in the pending specific performance suit.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders dismissed I.A.Nos.10 and 11 of 2023 set aside; liberty granted to respondent-defendant to cross-examine P.W.1.

Kamala Vs K.Periyasamy — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

C.R.P.Nos.4823 & 4824 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 22.12.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

¶6

C.R.P.Nos.4823 & 4824 of 2023

¶7

and

¶8

C.M.P.No.28616 of 2023

¶9

Kamala ... Petitioner in both C.R.P.s -Vs1. K.Periyasamy 2. V.Salomon 3. Mohanasundaram 4. K.Palanisamy ... Respondents in both C.R.P.s

¶10

Prayer in C.R.P.No. 4824 of 2023 : Civil Revision Petition is filed under

¶11

Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to allow the revision and

¶12

set aside the order of II Additional Sub Court, Erode passed in I.A.No.11/2023 in O.S.No.91/2014 dated 29.09.2023.

¶13

Prayer in C.R.P.No. 4823 of 2023 : Civil Revision Petition is filed under

¶14

Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to allow the revision and

¶15

set aside the order of II Additional Sub Court, Erode passed in I.A.No.10/2023 in O.S.No.91/2014 dated 29.08.2023.

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/4

¶17

C.R.P.Nos.4823 & 4824 of 2023

¶18

For Petitioner in both C.R.P.s : Ms.K.Indupriya

¶19

COMMON ORDER

¶20

Challenging the impugned orders passed in I.A.Nos.10 and 11 of 2023 in O.S.No. 91 of 2014 passed by the II Additional Sub Court, Erode respectively, the Revision Petitioner preferred these Civil Revision Petitions.

¶21

Since the relief sought challenging the order passed by the trial

¶22

judge, notice to the respondent is dispensed with.

¶23

Before the trial court, the revision petitioner filed applications to

¶24

reopen and recall of P.W.1 (husband of the petitioner herein). Both the applications were dismissed by the trial Judge holding that no specific reason was assigned by her and only to drag on the proceedings, she filed the said applications and already sufficient opportunity has been given. Aggrieved over the same, she preferred these Civil Revision Petitions.

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/4

¶26

C.R.P.Nos.4823 & 4824 of 2023

¶27

The learned counsel for revision petitioner would submit that specific performance suit was filed by the respondent/plaintiff for the false claim. To prove the defence, petitioner wanted to examine her husband. But, the trial judge without considering her submissions, erroneously dismissed the applications. Hence, she prayed to set aside the findings of trial judge.

¶28

Admittedly, now the case is pending for arguments. At this juncture, she filed application to reopen and the trial Judge has rightly dismissed the applications. However, to give one more opportunity, this Court is inclined to allow this petition.

¶29

Accordingly, these Civil Revision Petitions are allowed and the findings of trial judge in I.A.Nos.10 and 11 of 2023 in O.S.No. 91 of 2014 are set aside. Liberty is granted to the respondent/defendant to crossexamine P.W.1 to that effect. No costs. Consequently, connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶30

22.12.2023

¶31

Index : Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No sma

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/4

¶33

C.R.P.Nos.4823 & 4824 of 2023

¶34

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

¶35

sma

¶36

¶37

II Additional Sub Court, Erode

¶38

C.R.P.Nos.4823 & 4824 of 2023

¶39

22.12.2023

¶40

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/4

Kamala v. K.Periyasamy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamala v. K.Periyasamy

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

S.Djegadesan Vs Parameswari

Presitha Vs Sumod Kumar

G.Sarika Vs R.Sridhar

J.R.K. Anandharamanna Vs Msm Theater

Kamala Vs K.Periyasamy

G.Kasthuri Vs The Special Tahsildar (L.a) Cell- II