Disposed

A.Rajeshwari v. G.Manokaran

Madras HC5 Aug 2024CRP(MD)/1546/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Civil revision against appointment of an Advocate Commissioner at the plaintiff's instance in a suit alleged to be barred by res judicata given earlier litigation between the parties. The High Court put the impugned order on hold and directed the trial court to decide the pending preliminary-issue application expeditiously, disposing of the revision without costs.

What the court decided

AI extract

A.Rajeshwari Vs G.Manokaran — Property and Title | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

1 C.R.P.(MD)No.1546 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 05.08.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

C.R.P.(MD)No.1546 of 2024 and C.M.P.(MD)No.9127 of 2024

¶7

A.Rajeshwari ... Petitioner/Respondent / Defendant

¶8

Vs.

¶9

G.Manokaran ... Respondent/Petitioner / Plaintiff

¶10

PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 04.04.2024 passed by the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate No.I, Srivilliputhur in I.A.No.1 of 2023 in O.S.No.58 of 2022.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Sudalaiyandi

¶12

For Respondents : G.Manokaran,

¶13

Party-in-person.

¶14

¶15

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

¶16

2 C.R.P.(MD)No.1546 of 2024

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and the respondent in person.

¶19

This Civil revision petition is directed against the impugned order whereby an Advocate Commissioner has been appointed by the Court below at the instance of the plaintiff. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that the suit issue had already been decided in the previous round of litigation.

¶20

My attention is drawn to the judgment and decree dated 28.02.2006 in O.S.No.168 of 2002 on the file of the Additional District Munsif, Srivilliputhur. The suit was decreed in favour of the revision petitioner. Questioning the same, Manokaran filed A.S.No.34 of 2006 on the file of the Sub Court, Srivilliputhur. The appeal was dismissed. Challenging the same, Manokaran filed S.A.(MD)No.637 of 2010 and that it was dismissed by this Court on 04.03.2022. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner would contend that suppressing the aforesaid

¶21

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

¶22

3 C.R.P.(MD)No.1546 of 2024

¶23

developments, the present suit has been filed. If that be so, the remedy open to the petitioner is to seek rejection of plaint. The petitioner's counsel would respond by contending that he had already filed I.A.No.3 of 2023 to decide the issue of res judicata as preliminary issue.

¶24

The learned trial Munsif (District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate No.I, Srivilliputhur) is directed to dispose of the said I.A.No.3 of 2023 as expeditiously as possible. Till the said I.A. is decided, the impugned order shall be put on hold. In other words, the enforcement of the impugned order will abide by the outcome of the said I.A. I am giving this direction only to save judicial time. If the IA filed by the revision petitioner is allowed, the report that may be submitted by the Advocate Commissioner will become irrelevant. It is for this reason, I direct that the impugned order shall be put on hold till the preliminary issue is decided by the learned trial Munsif. This revision petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶25

05.08.2024

¶26

Index : yes/No Internet:Yes/No

¶27

PMU

¶28

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

¶29

4 C.R.P.(MD)No.1546 of 2024

¶30

G.R.SWAMINATHAN,J.

¶31

PMU

¶32

¶33

The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate No.I, Srivilliputhur.

¶34

The Record Keeper, V.R.Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶35

C.R.P.(MD).No.1546 of 2024 and C.M.P.(MD)No.9127 of 2024

¶36

05.08.2024

¶37

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

A.Rajeshwari v. G.Manokaran

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A.Rajeshwari v. G.Manokaran

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Ramasamy Vs The Superintending Engineer

Nallammal Vs The Secretary to Government

Jsc Golla Engineering Private Ltd., Vs Oil and Nature Gas Corporation Limited

S.Antony Raj Vs L.Reghu

Ganesan.M Vs G.Murugan

The Officers Club Vs The District Collector