Disposed

M.Kalimuthu v. R.Chithanathan

Madras HC20 Feb 2024CRP(MD)/433/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this civil revision petition, Justice G.ILANGOVAN directed the Additional District Judge, Srivilliputhur, to expedite execution proceedings in an existing execution petition and dispose of within six months. The petitioner, aged 74, sought speedy disposal to realize decree fruits.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Additional District Judge, Srivilliputhur to expedite execution proceedings and complete them within six months.

M.Kalimuthu Vs R.Chithanathan — Execution and Attachment | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

C.R.P(MD)No.433 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 20.02.2024

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN

¶6

C.R.P(MD)No.433 of 2024

¶7

M.Kalimuthu ... Petitioner / Plaintiff / Petitioner

¶8

¶9

R.Chithanathan ... Respondent

¶10

Prayer : Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to pass a direction to the learned Additional District Judge, Srivilliputhur, to expedite the execution proceedings in E.P.No.7 of 2020 in O.S.No.11 of 2016 and to dispose of the execution petition within a time frame.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Chandrasekaran

¶12

ORDER

¶13

This Civil Revision Petition is filed to pass a direction to the learned Additional District Judge, Srivilliputhur, to expedite the

¶14

1/4

¶15

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

¶16

C.R.P(MD)No.433 of 2024

¶17

execution proceedings in E.P.No.7 of 2020 in O.S.No.11 of 2016 and to dispose of the execution petition within a time frame.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is aged about 74 years and apprehending that he will not be able to realize the fruits of the decree, this Civil Revision Petition is filed, seeking speedy disposal of the suit. He further stated that in the main suit itself, the respondent remained ex parte. A decree was passed on 27.01.2020. Thereafter, E.P.No.7 of 2020 was filed to execute the decree. In the decree also the respondent remained ex parte. Later he filed an application for setting aside the ex parte order and sought for permission to file counter. The same allowed and counter was filed by the respondent. Inspite of that, the matter has been dragged on without any conclusion.

¶19

Considering the age of the petitioner, there shall be a direction

¶20

to the learned Additional District Judge, Srivilliputhur, to expedite the proceedings in E.P.No.7 of 2020 and complete the same within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶21

2/4

¶22

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

¶23

C.R.P(MD)No.433 of 2024

¶24

With this direction, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of.

¶25

No costs.

¶26

20.02.2024

¶27

NCC :Yes/No Index :Yes/No Internet : Yes/ No pnn

¶28

¶29

1.The Additional District Judge, Srivilliputhur. 2.The Record Keeper, Vernacular Records, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶30

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

¶31

3/4

¶32

C.R.P(MD)No.433 of 2024

¶33

G.ILANGOVAN, J.

¶34

pnn

¶35

ORDER IN C.R.P(MD)No.433 of 2024

¶36

20.02.2024

¶37

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

¶38

4/4

M.Kalimuthu v. R.Chithanathan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Kalimuthu v. R.Chithanathan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M. Anuchandra, Vs M. Mathan

Thowlath Meera Vs Habibullah

R.Eagappan, Vs Dhivyaa K.R.

Narayanakumar, Vs Rajeswari

T.B.S.S.C.S.Vadamalaiarajaya Pandiyan alias Ramesh Pandian Vs Chellathai

D.Thangaraj Pandian Vs T.S.M.Sampath Kumar