Allowed

Rengaswami v. P.Perumal

Madras HC5 Dec 2024CMP/23028/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition to condone 126 days' delay in filing a restoration petition after a second appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. Petitioner claimed he learned of the dismissal only when the respondent interfered with his possession. Court allowed the delay on payment of Rs.2000 costs and posted the matter.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 126 days condoned on condition petitioner pays Rs.2000 costs to respondent's counsel within one week; restoration petition to be heard.

Rengaswami Vs P.Perumal — Property and Title | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

C.M.P.No. 23028 of 2022 in S.A. No. 477 of 2005

¶3

T.V. THAMILSELVI, J.

¶4

This petition has been filed seeking to condone the delay of 126 days in filing the petition to restore the above second appeal, which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 09.03.2018.

¶5

Mr.I.Abrar Md. Abdullah, learned counsel for petitioner/appellant submitted that the above Second Appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution on 09.03.2018. He would submit that only on 2^nd week of August 2018, when the respondent attempted to interfere with the possession of suit property, the petitioner came to know that the Second Appeal was dismissed and thereafter, he came to Chennai and engaged the counsel on record. However, there is a delay of 126 days arose in filing the petition to restore the above Second Appeal, which is neither willful nor wanton, but due to the bonafide reason stated above. Hence, he has filed the above petition to restore the above S.A.

¶6

Mr. T.Panchatsaram, learned counsel for 1^st respondent appeared

¶7

and raised strong objections stating that sufficient reason was not assigned

¶8

for the said delay. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶9

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances, and on considering the

¶11

reasons assigned in the affidavit filed in support of the petition stating that only when the respondent attempted to interfere with his possession, he came to know about the dismissal of second appeal and thereafter, he took steps to restore the same and to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, this Court is inclined to allow this petition on condition that the petitioner/appellant shall pay a cost of Rs.2000/- payable to the learned counsel for 1^st respondent within a period of one week from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶12

Post the matter on 07.01.2025.

¶13

05.12.2024

¶14

rpp

¶15

N.B. : Issue order copy on 09.12.2024

¶16

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

¶17

¶18

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

¶19

rpp

¶20

C.M.P.No. 23028 of 2022

¶21

in S.A. No. 477 of 2005

¶22

05.12.2024

¶23

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

Rengaswami v. P.Perumal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rengaswami v. P.Perumal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Periyasamy Vs Chakravel

J.Baskaran Vs P.Jothiammal

Govindaraj Vs Perumiammal

A.Gnanavelan Vs Shayamala

C.Venkatesh Vs v.Skunthala and 6 Others

Rajendran Vs JAYAKUMAR(DIED)1. Rajaram