Allowed

1. C.Rajamani (Died) 2. Muthulakshmi v. 1. C.Arumugam (Died) 2. Devaraj

Madras HC24 Oct 2025CMP(MD)/12131/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Civil miscellaneous petitions to condone a 362-day delay in filing to set aside abatement caused by the death of the first respondent, and to bring his legal representatives on record in a second appeal. No objection was raised by respondents; the court allowed the petitions.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 362 days condoned; abatement set aside; legal representatives of deceased 1st respondent brought on record as respondent Nos.5 to 9.

1. C.Rajamani (Died) 2. Muthulakshmi Vs 1… — Succession and Inheritance | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

CMP(MD) NOS.12131, 12132 & 12133 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 24-10-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE P.VADAMALAI

¶6

CMP(MD) NOS. 12131, 12132 & 12133 of 2025 IN

¶7

SA(MD) SR NO. 33596 OF 2018

¶8

1.C.Rajamani (Died)

¶9

2.Muthulakshmi

¶10

3.Rajeshwari

¶11

4.Nagalakshmi

¶12

5.Murugesan

¶13

6.Chandrasekaran

¶14

Petitioner(s) in all petitions

¶15

¶16

1.C.Arumugam (Died) Innasi Ammal (Died) Lourdhu Mary (Died)

¶17

2.Devaraj

¶18

3.James

¶19

4.John

¶20

5.A.Kamaleswari

¶21

6.A.Andiyappan

¶22

1/5

¶23

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

¶24

CMP(MD) NOS.12131, 12132 & 12133 of 2025

¶25

7.T.Kaveri Ammal

¶26

8.Selvan @ Vinayagamoorthi

¶27

9.A.Chandramathi

¶28

Respondent(s) in all petitions

¶29

For Petitioner(s) in all petitions: Mr.M.R.Sreenivasan, Advocate

¶30

For Respondent(s) in all petitions : Mr.C.Vakeeswaran, Advocate for R5, R6, R7 & R9

¶31

Common Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Petitions are filed to condone the delay of 362 days in filing the petition to set aside the abatement caused due to the death of the 1^st respondent/C.Arumugam, to set aside the abatement caused due to the death of the 1^st respondent/C.Arumugam, and to bring on record the proposed respondent Nos.5 to 9 herein as the legal representatives of the deceased 1^st respondent/C.Arumugam and rank them as respondent Nos.5 to 9 in C.M.P.(MD)No.10426 of 2025 in S.A.(MD)SR No.33596 of 2018.

¶32

COMMON ORDER

¶33

These Civil Miscellaneous Petitions have been filed to condone the

¶34

delay of 362 days in filing the petition to set aside the abatement caused due to the death of the 1^st respondent/C.Arumugam, to set aside the abatement caused due to the death of the 1^st respondent/C.Arumugam,

¶35

2/5

¶36

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

¶37

CMP(MD) NOS.12131, 12132 & 12133 of 2025

¶38

and to bring on record the proposed respondent Nos.5 to 9 herein as the legal representatives of the deceased 1^st respondent/C.Arumugam and rank them as respondent Nos.5 to 9 in C.M.P.(MD)No.10426 of 2025 in S.A.(MD)SR No.33596 of 2018 on the file of this Court.

¶39

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned

¶40

counsel for respondent Nos.5, 6, 7 & 9, and I have perused the common affidavit filed in support of these petitions.

¶41

The learned counsel for respondent Nos.5, 6, 7 & 9 has filed a

¶42

memo along with an affidavit, stating that the 8^th respondent is a person with mental retardation and that the 8^th respondent is represented by his mother/5^th respondent herein. The said memo and affidavit are recorded.

¶43

The learned counsel for respondent Nos.5, 6, 7 & 9 has not raised any objection to allow these petitions.

¶44

3/5

¶45

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

¶46

CMP(MD) NOS.12131, 12132 & 12133 of 2025

¶47

Being satisfied with the reasons stated in the affidavit, these

¶48

Civil Miscellaneous Petitions are allowed.

24-10-2025

(2/3)

mkn

4/5

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

¶54

CMP(MD) NOS.12131, 12132 & 12133 of 2025

¶55

P.VADAMALAI, J.

¶56

mkn

¶57

CMP(MD) NOS. 12131, 12132 & 12133 of 2025

¶58

IN SA(MD) SR NO. 33596 OF 2018

24.10.2025

(2/3)

5/5

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

1. C.Rajamani (Died) 2. Muthulakshmi v. 1. C.Arumugam (Died) 2. Devaraj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

1. C.Rajamani (Died) 2. Muthulakshmi v. 1. C.Arumugam (Died) 2. Devaraj

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

Muthu Vs Ponram

1. R.Lakshmana Gowder (Died) 2. L.Murugan Vs Padmini

S.Paramasivam Vs v.Jeyamani (Died) 1. Yogavalli

1. a.Robert Anthoni (Died) 2. Dhanabackiyam Vs D. Kamraj

Sivagangai Roman Catholic Doicese Vs a.Naina Mohammed

D.Muthammal (Died) 1. Ayiram Padial Vs N.Muthammal