Dismissed

Soundharajan v. a. Pathmavathi

Madras HC22 Sept 2023CRP(MD)/2405/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This revision petition, filed under Section 115 CPC, sought to set aside an order dismissing an application to examine an Ameena regarding property valuation. The High Court found no perversity in the lower court's dismissal due to the petitioner's significant delay and lack of merit, emphasizing the need to send the correct signal to the District Judiciary.

What did the court decide?

The Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No cost.

Soundharajan Vs a. Pathmavathi — Execution and Attachment | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

C.R.P.(MD) No.2405 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 22.09.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

¶6

C.R.P.(MD) No.2405 of 2023

Soundharajan

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.A.Pathmavathi

2.R.Saraswathi ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer:- This Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of the Code of the Civil Procedure, 1908, to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 22.11.2022 made in E.A.No.194 of 2021 in E.A.No.50 of 2017 in E.P.No.90 of 2007 in R.C.O.P.No.192 of 2002 on the file of the Additional District Munsif Court, Madurai Town.

¶13

For Petitioner : M/s.M.D.Devi Saravana Priya

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioner to set aside

¶16

the impugned fair and decreetal order dated 22.11.2022 passed by the Additional District Munsif Court, Madurai Town in E.A.No.194 of 2021 in E.A.No.50 of 2017 in E.P.No.90 of 2007 in R.C.O.P.No.192 of 2002.

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ____________ Page No. 1 of 4_

¶18

C.R.P.(MD) No.2405 of 2023

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that he has

¶20

moved an application to examine the Ameena on the ground that the valuation of the property shown by the Ameena is very less when compared to the valuation arrived at by the petitioner.

¶21

However, while seeing the counter statement, it appears that while taking delivery, the petitioner was present in the nearby shop and refused to take delivery of all goods. Therefore, the Ameena was constrained to take delivery of the possession with the assistance of the police.

¶22

It is also relevant to refer to the observations made by the Court below. The very E.P. was terminated on 14.04.2016. It was observed that if the petitioner herein has got any objection in respect of inventory list, he should have filed an application on the final date of E.P. But, it appears that the application has been filed after 6 months. The Trial Court has also observed that after filing the said application, the petitioner has took around 4 years for filing the another application seeking leave of the Court to examine the Ameena. Only on that ground, the Court below has dismissed the application repelling the prayer of the petitioner.

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ____________ Page No. 2 of 4_

¶24

C.R.P.(MD) No.2405 of 2023

¶25

This Court could not find any perversity in the said order. If this Court admit this Civil Revision Petition, it would send wrong signal to District Judiciary. This Court do not find any infirmity in the impugned order passed by the Court below. Further, there are no merits in the present Civil Revision Petition. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. No cost.

¶26

22.09.2023

¶27

Internet : Yes/No NCC : Yes/No jen

¶28

¶29

The Additional District Munsif, Madurai Town.

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ____________ Page No. 3 of 4_

¶31

C.R.P.(MD) No.2405 of 2023

¶32

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

¶33

jen

¶34

C.R.P.(MD) No.2405 of 2023

¶35

22.09.2023

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ____________ Page No. 4 of 4_

Soundharajan v. a. Pathmavathi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Soundharajan v. a. Pathmavathi

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

C.Solai Alias Solaiappan Vs S.Palanisamy

Maheswaran, Vs Muthiah

Pitchaiah Vs Arun Mozhi Varman

Thirunavukarasu, Vs Dhasarathan

Muthu, S/O.Muthaiah Naicker Vs Suni Muthu

Marimuthu Vs J.Ramanathan