Dismissed

Mr.v.a.Sonraj, v. M.Govindarajan (Died)

Madras HC13 Feb 2024CRP(MD)/1489/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court disposed of a civil revision petition challenging an order dismissing an application for attachment of property and civil commitment. The court deemed continuation unnecessary as the petitioner filed a pending partition suit and elected to pursue that remedy. The petition was dismissed with liberty to re-agitate before the lower court.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petition disposed of with liberty to raise pleas before the concerned court.

Mr.v.a.Sonraj, Vs M.Govindarajan (Died) — Execution and Attachment | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

C.R.P(MD)No.1489 of 2017

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 13.02.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR

¶6

C.R.P.(MD)No.1489 of 2017

¶7

V.A.Sonraj : Petitioner/Petitioner/Plaintiff

¶8

J.K.Radha (died)

¶9

Vs.

¶10

M.Govindarajan (died)

¶11

1.Amsavalli

¶12

2.Prema

¶13

3.Chandira

¶14

4.Rajkumar

¶15

5.Kanchikumar

¶16

6.Priyadharshini : Respondents/Respondents/Defendants

¶17

Prayer : This Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the order passed in E.A.No.97 of 2010 in O.S.No.132 of 1987, dated 19.04.2017 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Thiruvaiyaru.

¶18

1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

C.R.P(MD)No.1489 of 2017

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Senthil Kumar For Respondents : No Appearance.

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order passed in E.A.No.97 of 2010 in O.S.No.132 of 1987, dated 19.04.2017 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Thiruvaiyaru, dismissing the petition filed under Order XXI Rule 32 of C.P.C., seeking orders to punish the respondents 5 and 6 for the alleged violation of the decree passed in O.S.No.132 of 1987 by attachment of the property and also commit them in civil prison.

¶23

When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in respect of 'B' schedule property herein, which is common property, the revision petitioner has filed a separate suit for partition and the same is pending and that since the revision petitioner has decided to workout their remedy in that suit, there is no necessity to continue the present Civil Revision.

¶24

2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

C.R.P(MD)No.1489 of 2017

¶26

Recording the said submission made by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of with liberty to raise the pleas now raised before the concerned Court. No costs.

¶27

13.02.2024

¶28

NCC :yes/No Index :yes/No Internet :yes/No das

¶29

¶30

1.The District Munsif, Thiruvaiyaru.

¶31

2.The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶32

3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

C.R.P(MD)No.1489 of 2017

¶34

K.MURALI SHANKAR,J.

¶35

DAS

¶36

Order made in C.R.P.(MD)No.1489 of 2017

¶37

Dated : 13.02.2024

¶38

4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Mr.v.a.Sonraj, v. M.Govindarajan (Died)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.v.a.Sonraj, v. M.Govindarajan (Died)

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

Muthusamy (Died) Vs Muthusamy

Balamurugan @ Ramesh, Vs P.Selvam

M.Kalyani Vs R.Sivaraman

C.Muthu, Vs a.L.Venkatachalam

P.Palanisamy, Vs P.Raju

Kasthuri Vs Kaliyappan S/O.Palaniappan