Revision by legal heirs of a deceased defendant challenging condonation of delay for setting aside abatement in a specific performance suit. The court held the procedural lapse was curable, discretion below was not arbitrary, and dismissed the revision.
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.(PD).No.2678 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 12.08.2024
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN
C.R.P.(PD).No.2678 of 2024 and C.M.P.No.14081 of 2024
T.Sekar .. Petitioner
Versus
S.Sevugarathinam (Died) 1. S.Jayalakshmi 2. Sundara Prasad
K.Thangavel Nadar (Died) 4. P.Muthumani Nadar 5. T.Selvi 6. T.Rasathi 7. T.Rajan .. Respondents
Prayer : Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the order and decretal order, dated 06.01.2024 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in O.S.No.106 of 2014 on the file of Subordinate Judge at Pollachi.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Rajapandian
1/7
C.R.P.(PD).No.2678 of 2024
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition is filed at the instance of the respondents
3 to 6.
2/7
C.R.P.(PD).No.2678 of 2024
was filed only on 20.12.2021, whereas, the application to condone the delay had been filed much earlier on 22.04.2019. Therefore, they pleaded that the said petition may be dismissed. After hearing both the sides, the learned Subordinate Judge at Pollachi allowed the application by way of the order, dated 06.01.2023. Against which, the present civil revision petition is filed.
would have to be filed while seeking to bring on record legal representatives in case the delay has exceeded 150 days from the date of the death of the
concerned party. He would state that there must be an application to condone the delay, to set aside the abatement and thereafter, an application to bring on record the legal representatives. Instead of filing three applications, the plaintiffs/respondents had filed only one application namely to condone the delay. Since only one application to condone the delay had been filed, the Court ought not to have entertained the application.
3/7
C.R.P.(PD).No.2678 of 2024
4/7
C.R.P.(PD).No.2678 of 2024
been cured. Therefore, I do not see any prejudice that has been caused to the civil revision petitioners.
added as legal representatives are in fact the legal representatives of the deceased K.Thangavel Nadar. Furthermore, the learned Subordinate Judge, Pollachi has exercised her discretion in condoning the delay. She has found sufficient cause to allow the said application. Where the Court below has exercised the discretion unless and until the same is capricious or arbitrary, the scope for interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is very limited. In any event, as the mistake committed by the Counsel has subsequently been corrected, I do not want to penalise the party. In case even one application had been filed and allowed, our courts have taken a view that it is deemed that the other applications also stood allowed. Those arose in a situation which is reverse in the present case namely where only
an application to bring on record had been filed without the other two applications. Applying the said principles to the facts of the present case, I do not find any reason to interfere.
5/7
C.R.P.(PD).No.2678 of 2024
connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
12.08.2024
Index : yes/no Speaking order/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation : yes/no grs
6/7
C.R.P.(PD).No.2678 of 2024
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
grs
To
The Subordinate Judge, Pollachi.
C.R.P.(PD).2678 of 2024 and C.M.P.No.14081 of 2024
12.08.2024
7/7
1 issue framed by the court
Whether failure to file separate applications to set aside abatement and bring legal representatives on record, alongside the condonation of delay application, justified interference under Article 227
1 provisions across 1 enactments
T.Sekar
S.Jayalakshmi
Sundara Prasad
Suganya Preetha
P.Muthumani Nadar
T.Selvi
V.Lakshminarayanan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
