Allowed¶21

Maduravasisni v. C Natarajan(Died)

Madras HC29 Jan 2025CMP/12393/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay 1769 days; restoration of Second Appeal dismissed for default; S.A.SR.No.72486 of 2017; C.M.P.No.12393 of 2024; Madras High Court; T.V. Thamilselvi; appeal at SR stage filed with connected S.A.No.530 of 2019; default list not noticed; multiplicity of proceedings avoided; senior citizen appellant; cost Rs.2000 Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority; Registry to number appeal; posted 24.03.2025; respondent absent despite notice.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 1769 days in filing the restoration petition condoned; S.A.SR.No.72486 of 2017 restored subject to payment of Rs.2000/- as cost to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority, Chennai within three weeks of receipt of the order copy; Registry to number the Second Appeal if otherwise in order and post the matter on 24.03.2025. ¶21

Maduravasisni Vs C Natarajan(Died) — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the delay of 1769 days in filing the petition to restore S.A.SR.No.72486 of 2017 (dismissed for default on 28.03.2019) should be condoned and the Second Appeal restored.

¶15-16

Court's answer

The reasons stated in the petitioner's affidavit were considered justifiable (Second Appeal pending since 2017, avoidance of multiplicity of proceedings, first appellant a senior citizen); the Court allowed the CMP, condoning the 1769-day delay and restoring the Second Appeal on condition that the petitioners pay a cost of Rs.2000/- to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority, Chennai within three weeks.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

The Registry was directed to number the restored Second Appeal if otherwise found to be in order and to post the matter on 24.03.2025.

¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Madras (T.V. Thamilselvi, J.) allowed C.M.P.No.12393 of 2024 seeking condonation of a 1769-day delay in filing the petition to restore S.A.SR.No.72486 of 2017, a Second Appeal dismissed for default on 28.03.2019. The appeal had been filed along with connected S.A.No.530 of 2019 and the appellants, believing both appeals were numbered, missed the default list. Considering that the Second Appeal had been pending since 2017, to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, the justifiability of the reasons in the affidavit, and that the first appellant is a senior citizen, the Court restored the Second Appeal on condition of payment of Rs.2,000/- as cost to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority, Chennai within three weeks, and directed the Registry to number the appeal if otherwise in order and post it on 24.03.2025. The respondent, served notice, did not appear.

¶1

C.M.P.No. 12393 of 2024 in S.A.SRNo.72486 of 2017

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 29-01-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

¶6

CMP NO. 12393 of 2024 AND

¶7

SA SR NO. 72486 OF 2017

¶8

MADURAVASISNI and another

¶9

Appellant(s) Vs

¶10

C Natarajan(died) Rep by his Legal Heir 1. Velmurugan

¶11

Respondent(s)

¶12

For Appellant(s):

¶13

Ms. P.Veena Suresh

¶14

ORDER

¶15

This Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed seeking to condone

¶16

the delay of 1769 days in filing the petition to restore S.A.SR.No.72486 of 2017, which was dismissed for default on 28.03.2019.

¶17

Ms.P.Veena Suresh, learned counsel for petitioners/appellants

¶18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/4

¶19

C.M.P.No. 12393 of 2024 in S.A.SRNo.72486 of 2017

¶20

submitted that along with connected Second Appeal in S.A.No.530 of 2019, this Second Appeal was filed and they were under the impression that both appeals wee numbered. Hence, they are not able to notice the default list. Now only they came to know, this Second Appeal is in SR stage and thereafter, they took steps to trace the bundle, but there is a delay of 1769 days arose filing the petition to restore the same, which is neither willful nor wanton, but due to the aforesaid reasons. Accordingly, he has filed the above petition to condone the delay and to restore the S.A.

¶21

Despite service of notice, none appeared on behalf of respondent. Considering the facts and circumstances, and the fact that this Second Appeal is pending from the year of 2017 and to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and the reasons stated by the petitioner in the affidavit seems to be justifiable one and also the fact that the first appellant is a senior citizen, this Court is inclined to allow this petition and to restore the above second appeal on condition that the petitioners shall pay a cost of Rs.2000/- payable to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority, Chennai within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶22