Plaintiff challenged trial court orders allowing the third defendant to reopen a partition suit and recall P.W.1 for cross examination after setting aside her ex-parte order. The High Court found no fault with the orders and dismissed the revision petitions, directing disposal of the suit within two months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
C.R.P.(MD)Nos.534 & 535 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATE : 27.02.2024
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR
C.R.P.(MD)Nos.534 and 535 of 2024 and C.M.P(MD)Nos.2670 and 2671 of 2024
Kumar : Petitioner/1st Respondent / Plaintiff (in both petitions) Vs. 1.Ramalakshmi : 1st Respondent/Petitioner/3rd Defendant (in both petitions) 2.Ramesh 3.Mahalingam : Respondents 2 & 3 /Respondent 2 & 3 / Defendants 1 & 2 (in both petitions)
Common Prayer : These Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal order passed in I.A.Nos.7 and 8 of 2023 in O.S.No.6 of 2020 dated 21.09.2023 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Sattur.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Solaisamy
C.R.P.(MD)Nos.534 & 535 of 2024
ORDER
These Civil Revision Petitions are directed against the order passed in I.A.Nos.7 and 8 of 2023 in O.S.No.6 of 2020 dated 21.09.2023 on the file of
the Subordinate Court, Sattur, allowing the petition to recall P.W.1 for cross examination and to reopen the case.
2.The revision petitioner as plaintiff has filed the above suit for partition and allotment of ¼ shares to the plaintiff. The third defendant, who remained ex-parte earlier, has filed an application for setting aside the ex-parte order and the same came to be allowed. Thereafter, the third defendant has filed a written statement along with counter claim and after receipt of the same by the trial Court, she has filed the above applications one to recall P.W.1 for further cross examination and other to reopen the case.
filed the above suit alleging that the third defendant is having ¼ share in the suit property and in counter claim, she has specifically stated that she has not
C.R.P.(MD)Nos.534 & 535 of 2024
claimed any right over the suit property and that there is no need or necessity for cross examine the P.W.1.
C.R.P.(MD)Nos.534 & 535 of 2024
Court is directed to proceed with the trial and dispose of the suit in O.S.No.6 of 2020 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
27.02.2024
NCC :yes/No Index :yes/No Internet:yes/No das
To
2.The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
C.R.P.(MD)Nos.534 & 535 of 2024
K.MURALI SHANKAR,J.
DAS
Order made in C.R.P.(MD)Nos.534 and 535 of 2024 and C.M.P(MD)Nos.2670 and 2671 of 2024
Dated : 27.02.2024
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the trial court's orders reopening the case and recalling P.W.1 for further cross examination by the third defendant, who had been set aside from ex-parte status, were sustainable.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kumar
Ramalakshmi
Ramesh
Mahalingam
K.Murali Shankar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
