A.Thennarasu v. a.Ravi
Case brief
What is this about?
Civil Revision Petition under CPC Section 115 challenging dismissal of leave to appeal due to lapse of 888 days. High Court held petitioner failed to explain delay and dismissed revision.
What did the court decide?
Civil Revision Petition No.1359 of 2019 dismissed with no order as to costs.
What the court decided
C.R.P.(MD) No.1359 of 2019
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 30.11.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
C.R.P.(MD) No.1359 of 2019
A.Tennarasu .. Petitioner/Petitioner/ Appellant Vs.
1.A.Ravi 2.A.Balaguru 3.A.Illavarasan 4.J.Rajeshwari 5.R.Ramalakshmi 6.A.Pappa .. Respondents/Respondents/ Defendants 1 and 3 to 6
Prayer: Petition filed under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code to set aside the order dated 04.07.2019 in I.A.No.36 of 2018 in U/F.A.S.No.--of 2018 on the file of the Principal District Court, Thanjavur.
For Petitioner : Ms.G.Porkodi for Mr.G.Karnan For R1 : Mr.D.Senthil
_________Page 1 of 6
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner showed sufficient cause for condoning an 888-day delay in preferring an appeal before the Principal District Judge.
Whether the Revision Court should interfere with the dismissal of the interlocutory application to condone the delay under Section 115 CPC.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
A.Tennarasu
- respondent
1.A.Ravi
- respondent
2.A.Balaguru
- respondent
3.A.Illavarasan
- respondent
4.J.Rajeshwari
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court