Arumugam v. Elakkiya
Case brief
What is this about?
The Madras High Court, in a civil revision petition, held that numbering a plaint is a ministerial act where the judge must not conduct a roving enquiry into the cause of action. The court directed the District Judge to number the plaint and proceed.
What did the court decide?
The learned Principal District Judge, Karur, was directed to number the plaint and proceed with the same in accordance with law.
What the court decided
CRP(MD).No.3024 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 02.12.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI
C.R.P(MD)No.3024 of 2024
1.Arumugam 2.Vanitha
3.Durai : Petitioners / Plaintiffs
Vs.
1.Elakkiya 2.Karthick @ Palanisamy : Respondents / defendants
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the order of returning the plaint, dated 07.11.2024 in ununumbered O.S.No.... 2024 on the file of the learned Principal District Court, Karur.
For Petitioner : Mr. T. Antony Arulraj
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the trial court was correct in returning the plaint at the stage of numbering without questioning the validity of documents.
Whether numbering the plaint is a ministerial act and cannot be preceded by a roving enquiry into cause of action.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
1.Arumugam 2.Vanitha (3.Durai)
- respondent
1.Elakkiya 2.Karthick @ Palanisamy
Coram
K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court