Trial court allowed impleading legal representatives of deceased defendants ex parte, on condition of cost. The revision challenging that order was dismissed: the petitioner had not filed a counter despite opportunity and the court seldom interferes with delay condoned by a trial judge.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
C.R.P.(NPD)No.1611 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.04.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN
C.R.P.(NPD)No.1611 of 2024 and C.M.P.No.8603 of 2024
S.Rajendran
.. Petitioner
Vs.
S.Senniapan (died)
S.Subbaian (died)
P.Subbathal (died)
Page No 1 of 9
C.R.P.(NPD)No.1611 of 2024
6.P.Valliammal
7.R.Karuppathal
8.C.Senniappan
C.Ramasamy (died)
9.C.Aruchamy
10.M.Valliammal
11.Ponnammal
Chinnammal (died)
S.Subbaian (died)
12.S.Senniappan
E.Sennimalai Gounder (died)
13.S.Ramasamy
14.Valliammal
E.Sinnia Gounder (died)
C.Ramathal (died)
15.C.Sinnian
16.Subbathal
17.Ponnathal
18.K.Shanmugam
Page No 2 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(NPD)No.1611 of 2024
19.K.Subramanian
20.B.Deivathal
21.Chinnammal
22.Saraswathi
23.Subramaniam
24.Parvathi
25.Nachimuthu
26.Amaravathi
27.Sarojini
28.Rajkumar
29.Kaliammal
30.A.E.Subramaniam
31.E.Ramasamy
32.Pavithra
33.Vinodhini
34.S.Rangammal
35.Valliammal
36.Loganathan
Page No 3 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(NPD)No.1611 of 2024
37.Padmavathi
38.S.Valliammal
39.P.Subbulakshmi
40.S.Balusamy
41.R.Kalamani
42.V.Kannammal 43.V.Ponnusamy V.Srinivasan (died)
Sinnammal (died)
A.S.R.Senniappan (died)
44.A.S.R.Ramasamy
45.S.Balamani
46.S.Padmavathi
47.S.Sivaprakash
48.K.Subbathal
S.Periammal (died)
R.Valliammal (died)
49.S.Rangasamy
50.S.Subbathal
Page No 4 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(NPD)No.1611 of 2024
51.K.Saraswathi
52.S.Duraisamy
S.Ramasamy @ Ramanna Gounder (died)
53.A.C.Mahalingam
54.S.Maheswari
55.Praveen
56.Srinidhi
57.Valliammal
58.Senthilkumar
59.Vijayalakshmi
60.Tamilselvi
61.R.Sivakumar
62.Valliammal
63.Marathal
64.Senniappan .. Respondents
Prayer : The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code, to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 27.07.2023 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in O.S.No.132 of 2017 on the file of the District Munsif, Sulur.
Page No 5 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(NPD)No.1611 of 2024
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Tamilarasan
ORDER
O.S.No.132 of 2017 had been presented by the respondents herein. In
the said suit, an application was taken out to bring on record the legal representatives of the deceased defendants and they were arrayed as respondent Nos.22 and 34 in the said application. That application was numbered as I.A.No.1 of 2022.
Page No 6 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(NPD)No.1611 of 2024
came to be preferred before this Court only on 15.02.2024. I do not want to
lay latches as the ground for rejecting this revision.
the 34th respondent. He had not filed a counter despite an opportunity having been granted by the Court. The Court had waited for his counter to be filed and since he did not take a stand, the application stood allowed.
M.Krishnamurthy [(1998) 7 SCC 123] .
Page No 7 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(NPD)No.1611 of 2024
Court and had invited the order on himself, I am not inclined to interfere
with the same in the revision.
costs. The connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
18.04.2024
mkn2
Index:Yes/No Speaking Order :Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes/No
To
The District Munsif, Sulur
Page No 8 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(NPD)No.1611 of 2024
V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
mkn2
C.R.P.(NPD)No.1611 of 2024 and C.M.P.No.8603 of 2024
18.04.2024
Page No 9 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1 issue framed by the court
Should the High Court interfere in revision with the trial court's order allowing impleadment of legal representatives of deceased defendants after setting the non-filing respondents ex parte?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
N.Balakrishnan vs. M.KrishnamurthyRelied on¶7
(1998) 7 SCC 123 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
S.Rajendran
K.Chenniappan (died)
1.K.Ramasamy
2.A.Subbathal
3.A.Vasanthamani
4.Lakshmi
V.Lakshminarayanan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
