Allowed

Manivannan, v. T.R.Metha

Madras HC20 Feb 2023TR CMP(MD)/189/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench held that the appellant had losing trust in the Judge due to a dismissed perjury application. In the interest of justice, the appeal was transferred from one Additional District Court to another within the same district without costs.

What did the court decide?

C.M.A.No.10 of 2021 transferred to I Additional District Court, Tiruchirappalli, to be disposed of before 31.04.2023.

Manivannan, Vs T.R.Metha — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.189 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 20.02.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶6

Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.189 of 2022 and

¶7

C.M.P(MD)No.3403 of 2022

¶8

Manivannan

¶9

... Petitioner/ Appellant

¶10

Vs.

¶11

T.R.Metha ... Respondent/ Respondent

¶12

PRAYER : Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to withdraw the case in C.M.A.No.10 of 2021 on the file of the III Additional District Judge, Tiruchirappalli and transfer the same to any other Court in Trichy District as deem fit by this Court.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Karnan For Respondent : Mr.T.Leninkumar

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The present transfer civil miscellaneous petitioner has been filed

¶16

by the appellant in C.M.A.No.10 of 2021 seeking to transfer the same to

¶17

some other Court in Trichy District from the file of III Additional District Court, Tiruchirappalli.

¶18

A perusal of the averments indicates that the petitioner has

¶19

expressed some inability to argue the case without taking any action for https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶20

1/4

¶21

Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.189 of 2022

¶22

perjury. When the matter was posted for arguments, the petitioner has filed I.A.No.2 of 2022 under Section 340 of the Code of Civil Procedure

¶23

for perjury as against his father-in-law and the learned counsel appearing for his wife on the allegation that his wife has not signed in the vakalat. The learned III Additional District Munsif, Tiruchirappalli, has examined the wife in person and he has arrived at a satisfaction that his wife has filed the vakalat. Therefore, I.A.No.2 of 2022 has been dismissed. The petitioner has got some apprehension to argue the appeal before the same Judge, who has dismissed I.A.No.2 of 2022. However, the allegations made as against the concerned Judicial Officer are not legally acceptable and there is no substance in the same. Any how, in the interest of justice, C.M.A.No.10 of 2021 pending on the file of the III Additional District Court, Tiruchirappalli, is hereby transferred to the I Additional District Court, Tiruchirappalli, to be disposed of on or before 31.04.2023 .

¶24

With the above observation, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶25

20.02.2023

¶26

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Rmk

¶27

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

¶28

2/4

¶29

Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.189 of 2022

¶30

¶31

1.The III Additional District Judge, Tiruchirappalli.

¶32

2.The I Additional District Judge, Tiruchirappali.

¶33

3.The Record Keeper, Vernacular Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶34

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

¶35

3/4

¶36

Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.189 of 2022

¶37

R.VIJAYAKUMAR ,J.

¶38

Rmk

¶39

Order made in Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.189 of 2022

¶40

20.02.2023

¶41

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

¶42

4/4

Manivannan, v. T.R.Metha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manivannan, v. T.R.Metha

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

Ilangovan Vs Basheer Ahamed (Died), 1) Faritha Begum

Murugan Vs Devadhas

Murugan Vs Rajakumari

M/s.Nishok Impex, Vs Sri Eshan Enterprises

Rajeswari Vs Murugappan

Eswari Vs Rasuvadan