Dismissed

Muthu, S/O.Muthaiah Naicker v. Suni Muthu

Madras HC22 Sept 2023CRP(MD)/349/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court dismissed a civil revision petition filed under Article 227 to strike off a plaint. The court refused interference as the petitioner failed to produce the basis order despite having been directed to do so.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner given liberty to move an appropriate application for rejection of plaint before the Court below. No order as to costs.

Muthu, S/O.Muthaiah Naicker Vs Suni Muthu — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

C.R.P.(MD).No.349 of 2018

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 22.09.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

¶6

C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.349 of 2018 and

¶7

C.M.P(MD) No.1594 of 2018

¶8

Muthu

¶9

... Petitioner/Defendant

¶10

-vs-

¶11

Suni Muthu

¶12

Minor. Suruthiga D/o. Muthu

¶13

Minor Srikanth D/o. Muthu (R2 and R3 represented by R1) ... Respondents/Plaintiffs

¶14

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to call for the records pertaining to plaint in O.S.No.88 of 2017, on the file of Sub Court, Ambasamuthram and strike off the same.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.K.P.Narayanakumar

¶16

For Respondents : Mr.R.J.Kathick

¶17

1/4

¶18

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

¶19

C.R.P.(MD).No.349 of 2018

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

The instant Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to call for the records pertaining to plaint in O.S.No.88 of 2017, on the file of Sub Court, Ambasamuthram and strike off the same.

¶22

2. This Court, vide order, dated 08.09.2023 directed the petitioner to produce the order in O.P.No.411 of 2015, which is the basis for the Civil Revision Petition. In spite of so many opportunities, the petitioner is not in a position to submit the said document whatsoever. Whenever the application has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to strike off the same, the parties should be supported with all documents so as to substantiate the stand. Here, the petitioner is not in a position to produce the copy of the order.

¶23

3. Therefore, this Court is of the view that it is not appropriate to interfere with the suit in O.S.No.88 of 2017 on the file of the Sub Court, Ambasamuthram, under the revisionary jurisdiction. Therefore, this Court is inclined to dismiss the Civil Revision Petition.

¶24

2/4

¶25

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

¶26

C.R.P.(MD).No.349 of 2018

¶27

4. In the result, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner is given liberty to move an appropriate application for rejection of plaint before the Court below. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶28

22.09.2023

¶29

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No ebsi

¶30

To 1. The Sub Court, Ambasamuthram.

¶31

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

¶32

C.R.P.(MD).No.349 of 2018

¶33

C.KUMARAPPAN,J.

¶34

ebsi

¶35

C.R.P(PD)(MD)No.349 of 2018

¶36

22.09.2023

¶37

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

Muthu, S/O.Muthaiah Naicker v. Suni Muthu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muthu, S/O.Muthaiah Naicker v. Suni Muthu

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

Soundharajan Vs a. Pathmavathi

Thirunavukarasu, Vs Dhasarathan

Marimuthu Vs J.Ramanathan