Disposed

Ponnayyan, v. Nadankutty Nadar @ Nathan Kutty (Died)

Madras HC11 Nov 2024CRP(MD)/793/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Revision challenged an interlocutory amendment order; the suit had since been decided and the judgment attained finality with no appeal filed. The High Court held nothing survived in the revision and disposed of it, closing connected miscellaneous petitions.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petition disposed of with no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

Ponnayyan, Vs Nadankutty Nadar @ Nathan Kutty (Died) — Property and Title | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

C.R.P.(MD)No.793 of 2017

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 11.11.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR

¶6

C.R.P.(MD)(PD)No.793 of 2017 and C.M.P.(MD)Nos.3585 of 7913 of 2017

Ponnayyan

... Petitioner

vs.

1.Nadankutty Nadar @ Nathan Kutty (Died)

¶11

2.Ponnesam

¶12

3.Vasantha

¶13

4.Kala

¶14

5.Ramesh

¶15

6.Suresh

¶16

7.Rajesh

¶17

...Respondents

¶18

(R2 to R7 were brought on record as LRs of the deceased sole respondent vide order of this Court, dated 08.06.2023 made in C.M.P.(MD)No.1707 of 2021)

¶19

PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 15.03.2017 made in I.A.No.76 of 2017 in O.S.No.287 of 2014 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Kuzhithurai.

¶20

Page 1 of 4

¶21

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

¶22

For Petitioner :Mr.R.Devaraj For R1 :Died For R5 :No Appearance For R2 to R4, R6 and R7 :Bata due *****

¶23

C.R.P.(MD)No.793 of 2017

¶24

ORDER

¶25

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed challenging the order dated 15.03.2017 passed in I.A.No.76 of 2017 in O.S.No.287 of 2014 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Kuzhithurai.

¶26

2.The Petition was originally filed under Order VI Rule 17 r/w Section 151 of CPC. The main contention of the Revision Petitioner is with regard to the application to amend the pleadings was filed after the cross examination.

¶27

3.Though notice was issued to the respondents at the stage of admission stage, there is no representation for the respondents.

¶28

4.The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the judgment itself was delivered in O.S.No.287 of 2014 on 19.04.2020.

¶29

Page 2 of 4

¶30

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

¶31

C.R.P.(MD)No.793 of 2017

¶32

5.Though the learned Counsel for the petitioner makes an attempt to impress this Court that the suit itself was dismissed only for non prosecution and not on merits, when the judgment has attained the finality and in the absence of any appeal challenging the order passed by the Court below, whether it is an ex parte order or on merits, nothing survives.

¶33

6.In view of the above, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶34

11.11.2024

¶35

Internet :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No Speaking Order :Yes/No To

¶36

The Principal District Munsif, Kuzhithurai.

¶37

________________ Page 3 of 4_

¶38

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

¶39

C.R.P.(MD)No.793 of 2017

¶40

N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.

¶41

cmr

¶42

C.R.P.(MD)(PD)No.793 of 2017

¶43

11.11.2024

¶44

________________ Page 4 of 4_

¶45

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

Ponnayyan, v. Nadankutty Nadar @ Nathan Kutty (Died)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ponnayyan, v. Nadankutty Nadar @ Nathan Kutty (Died)

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

Ramayee Vs Begum Jan

Sennan Vs Shoba

Marappan Vs Sanjeevan

Arjunan Vs Mariappan(Died), Subramanian

N. Amutha Vs Jason Kennedy

K.Mathivanan Vs Veerachamy