Disposed¶27

Subadra v. Chandrakantha Bakthavachalu

Madras HC9 Dec 2025CMP/18353/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras HC, C.M.P. No. 18353 of 2023 in A.S. No. 606 of 2018, order dated 09.12.2025 (C.V. Karthikeyan & K. Kumaresh Babu, JJ.; order by C.V. Karthikeyan, J.): petition under Order 5 Rule 20 CPC for substituted service (affixture and 'Makkal Kural' publication) on 2nd respondent closed as futile — 2nd respondent ex parte at trial and had vacated premises; 1st respondent alone contesting; records to counsel for 1st respondent; appeal suit listed 19.01.2026. Keywords: substituted service, affixture, publication, Order 5 Rule 20 CPC, ex parte, petition closed.

What did the court decide?

No relief on the prayer for substituted service; the petition was closed. Necessary records to be served on learned counsel for the 1st respondent; appeal suit (A.S. No. 606 of 2018) to be listed on 19.01.2026. ¶27

Subadra Vs Chandrakantha Bakthavachalu — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 09.12.2025

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. KUMARESH BABU

¶7

C.M.P. No. 18353 of 2023

¶8

¶9

A.S. No. 606 of 2018

¶10

Subadra W/o. Mr. Chandran, No. 166/2, 4th Avenue, Shakthi Colony, Anna Nagar, Chennai – 600 040.

¶11

..Petitioner

¶12

Vs.

¶13

Chandrakantha Bakthavachalu W/o Mr. Bakthavachalam, No.11, Sakthi Nagar, Arumbakkam, Chennai – 600 106.

¶14

Rajapandian,

¶15

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

¶16

S/o. Mr. Swaminathan, D-14, Vasantham Apartments, No.260, Lloyds Road, Gopalapuram, Chennai – 600 086. ..Respondents

¶17

Prayer: Petition under Order 5 Rule 20 CPC to permit the

¶18

appellant/petitioner to serve the 2nd respondent by substituted service by

¶19

affixture in the last known residence and by publication in one issue of '

¶20

Makkal Kural'.

¶21

For Petitioner :: Mr.V.G. Suresh Kumar

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

(Order of the Court was made by C.V. KARTHIKEYAN,J.)

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant would state that 1st respondent alone is the contesting respondent. The 2nd respondent is a vendor of appellant's mother and he had remained ex parte during the trial.

¶25

In view of the abovesaid fact, taking notice to the 2nd respondent would only be an exercise in futility as the 2nd respondent has also vacated the premises. Therefore, this petition seeking service on the

¶26

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

¶27

2nd respondent through substituted service is closed.

¶28

Necessary records to be served on the learned counsel for the 1st respondent.

¶29

List the appeal suit on 19.01.2026. (C.V.K.J.) (K.B.J.) nv 09.12.2025

¶30

To 1. Chandrakantha Bakthavachalu W/o Mr. Bakthavachalam, No.11, Sakthi Nagar, Arumbakkam, Chennai – 600 106. 2. Rajapandian, S/o. Mr. Swaminathan, D-14, Vasantham Apartments, No.260, Lloyds Road, Gopalapuram, Chennai – 600 086.

¶31

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

¶32

C.V. KARTHIKEYAN,J.

¶33

AND

¶34

K. KUMARESH BABU,J.

¶35

¶36

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

¶37