Dismissed

Narayanan v. Ravichandran

Madras HC18 Mar 2024CRP(MD)/1567/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed a civil revision petition as abated. The court noted that one petitioner died before filing, and the co-petitioner died before judgment, while steps for joining deceased respondents were not taken, resulting in the closure of the connected miscellaneous petition.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as abated; Connected miscellaneous petition closed.

Narayanan Vs Ravichandran — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

C.R.P(MD)No.1567 of 2018

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATE : 18.03.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR

¶6

C.R.P(PD)(MD)No.1567 of 2018 and C.M.P(MD)No.6896 of 2018

¶7

1.Narayanan

¶8

2.Arunachalam : Petitioners/Petitioners

Vs.

1.Ravichandran

2.Anbukani

3.Rajasekaran

4.N.Rathinavel Nadar

5.N.Danushkodi

6.V.Vijayaraman : Respondents/Respondents

¶16

Prayer : This Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to call for the records relating to the impugned fair and decreetal order, dated 27.06.2018 in I.A.No.281 of 2018 in O.S.No.11 of 2011 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Vadipatti and set aside the same.

¶17

1/4

¶18

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

¶19

C.R.P(MD)No.1567 of 2018

¶20

For Petitioners : Mr.K.Muthuganesapandian For Respondents : Mr.R.Senthil Kumar, for R1 to R3. : No Appearance, for R4 to R6.

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order passed in I.A.No.281 of 2018 in O.S.No.11 of 2011, dated 27.06.2018 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Vadipatti

¶23

When the matter is taken up for hearing today (i.e.,18.03.2024), the

¶24

learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 3 would submit that the second petitioner died on 14.11.2011 itself and the same was recorded in the trial Court and that the first petitioner also died on 01.09.2021.

¶25

It is seen from the records, the civil revision came to be filed by the

¶26

first petitioner along with the deceased second petitioner. Moreover, despite granting sufficient time, steps for the deceased respondents 4 and 5 were not

¶27

taken sofar.

¶28

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

¶29

C.R.P(MD)No.1567 of 2018

¶30

In view of the above, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as

¶31

abated. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

¶32

18.03.2024

¶33

NCC :Yes/No Index :Yes/No Internet : Yes/ No das

¶34

¶35

1.The District Munsif Court, Vadipatti.

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

C.R.P(MD)No.1567 of 2018

¶39

K.MURALI SHANKAR,J.

¶40

DAS

¶41

C.R.P(PD)(MD)No.1567 of 2018 and C.M.P(MD)No.6896 of 2018

¶42

Dated : 18.03.2024

¶43

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

Narayanan v. Ravichandran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narayanan v. Ravichandran

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

Anandharaj.M Vs the District Collector

Gyas Mohammed.E Vs the Commissioner of Municipal Administration

M.Ahamed Nasira, Vs Yusuf Rifaya

Subramani, Vs Vairavan

Mallika Patel Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

P.Jeyalakshmi, Vs T.Kaliyaperumal