Allowed

R.Chandrasekaran v. v.N.Ramamoorthy

Madras HC27 Mar 2024CRP(MD)/288/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 challenged the dismissal of an application for amendment of plaint by the District Munsif Court. The court allowed the revision, set aside the impugned order, and permitted the amendment subject to payment of costs for delay.

What did the court decide?

Order of the District Munsif Court dismissing the amendment application was set aside. Revision allowed. Connected miscellaneous petition closed.

R.Chandrasekaran Vs v.N.Ramamoorthy — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

C.R.P(MD)No.288 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 27.03.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN

¶6

C.R.P(MD)No.288 of 2024 and CMP(MD)No.1333 of 2024

¶7

R.Chandrasekaran ...Petitioner/Petitioner/Plaintiff

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.V.N.Ramamoorthy

¶10

..1^st Respondent /Respondent/Defendant No.1 2.The Assistant Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., Ponnagaram, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District.

¶11

..2^nd Respondent/Respondent/Proposed 2^nd Defendant

¶12

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the

¶13

Constitution of India to set aside the order passed in I.A.No. 6 of 2023 in O.S.No.31 of 2019 dated 22.12.2023 on the file of the

¶14

District Munsif Court, Rajapalayam.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sivakumar For R1 : Mr.M.Thirunavukkarasu For R2 : M/s.S.Banumathi

¶16

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

¶17

1/4

¶18

C.R.P(MD)No.288 of 2024

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

This Civil Revision is filed to set aside the order passed in I.A.No. 6 of 2023 in O.S.No.31 of 2019 dated 22.12.2023 on the

¶21

file of the District Munsif Court, Rajapalayam.

¶22

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

¶23

the petitioner has filed I.A.No.6 of 2023 in O.S.No.31 of 2019 for amendment of plaint. The trial court has dismissed the said application.

¶24

The learned counsel for the 1^st respondent would

¶25

submit that the trial court has rightly dismissed the petition for amendment and the same does not warrant interference by this Court.

¶26

4.On 20.03.2024, when the matter was taken up for

¶27

hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to give Rs.2,500/- to the respondent for the delay caused by him. Today, it is

¶28

2/4

¶29

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

¶30

C.R.P(MD)No.288 of 2024

¶31

submitted that the order dated 20.03.2024 is complied with by the petitioner and the learned counsel for the 1^st respondent submitted that the 1^st respondent has received the said amount.

¶32

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,

¶33

this Court is inclined to set aside the order impugned in this revision and the same is set aside. Accordingly, this revision is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶34

27.03.2024 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No CM To 1. The District Munsif Court, Rajapalayam.

¶35

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

¶36

3/4

¶37

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

¶38

C.R.P(MD)No.288 of 2024

¶39

G. ILANGOVAN, J.

¶40

¶41

C.R.P(MD)No.288 of 2024 and CMP(MD)No.1333 of 2024

¶42

27.03.2024

¶43

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

R.Chandrasekaran v. v.N.Ramamoorthy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Chandrasekaran v. v.N.Ramamoorthy

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

Valliyammai @ Venmadhi, Vs Nagendhiran @ Ranjith

George David, Vs Jenshilal

Rajeswari Vs Dhanalakshmi

J.Sahayarani, Vs M/s.Oriental Insurance Company

Priyadharshini Vs K.Harrish

Anitha R.Sivanandam Nadar Vs C.kamaraj Nadr (died) 1.E.Packyaraj