Allowed

G. Rajendran v. P.C. Ramalingam (Died) 1. Somasundaram

Madras HC21 Jun 2024CMP/4599/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed three ciphered petitions to condone 250-day delay in setting aside abatement caused by the respondent's death, impleading new legal representatives.

What did the court decide?

Allowance of petitions to condone 250-day delay; impleading of proposed legal representatives as respondents 1 to 6; payment of Rs.1000 cost to State Legal Services Authority.

G. Rajendran Vs P.C. Ramalingam (Died) 1… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

C.M.P. Nos.4599, 4600 & 4604 of 2024 in S.A.No.525 of 2023

¶2

C.M.P.Nos.4599, 4600 & 4604 of 2024

¶3

¶4

S.A. No. 525 of 2023

¶5

T.V. THAMILSELVI, J.

¶6

These petitions have been filed seeking to condone the delay of 250 days in filing the petition to set aside the abatement, to set aside the abatement caused due to the death of sole respondent, and to bring on record the proposed respondents 1 to 6 herein as legal representatives of deceased sole respondent.

¶7

Mr.C.Jagadish, learned counsel for petitioners/appellants submitted that pending appeal, sole respondent died on 15.01.2023. He would submit that the petitioner came to know about his death only on return of private notice sent to him and it is not due to any willful negligence on his part. However, the delay of 250 days arose and the delay is neither willful nor wanton. Hence, he has filed the above petitions.

¶8

On perusal of records, it reveals that the paper publication was effected and the name of respondents also printed in the cause list, but there is no representation on the side of respondents. So, on considering the facts and circumstances and being satisfied with the reasons assigned in the affidavit, all the petitions are allowed on condition that the petitioner shall

¶9

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1\3

¶10

C.M.P. Nos.4599, 4600 & 4604 of 2024 in S.A.No.525 of 2023

¶11

pay a cost of Rs.1000/- payable to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority, Chennai within a period of one week from today. The proposed legal representatives of the sole respondent are impleaded as respondents 1 to 6 in the above Second Appeal. The Registry is directed to carry out the necessary amendment in the cause title and post the matter on 03.07.2024.

¶12

21.06.2024

¶13

rpp

¶14

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2\3

¶15

C.M.P. Nos.4599, 4600 & 4604 of 2024 in S.A.No.525 of 2023

¶16

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

¶17

rpp

¶18

C.M.P.Nos. 4599, 4600 & 4604 of 2024

¶19

in S.A. No. 525 of 2023

¶20

21.06.2024

¶21

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

G. Rajendran v. P.C. Ramalingam (Died) 1. Somasundaram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G. Rajendran v. P.C. Ramalingam (Died) 1. Somasundaram

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

Similar cases

Rajeshkumar Vs the State Rep. by

Tmt. S. Agila, Vs T. Jogi

Mohamed Jaseer Vs the Inspector of Police

M.S.Subramanian Vs Sundaram Brake Linings Ltd.

Seema Devi Vs Dr. Devasenapathy

Parmeshwari Vs the State Rep by