Dismissed¶33

S.P.Krishnan v. Tm Sivaramakrishnan (Died)

Madras HC4 Aug 2025CRP/527/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court (N. Sathish Kumar, J., 04.08.2025), C.R.P.No.527 of 2013 with C.M.P.Nos.25135, 25154 & 25149 of 2023 — dismissal for default of a Section 115 CPC revision against a District Munsif, Tiruchengode order in R.E.A.No.123 of 2011 in R.E.A.No.29 of 2009 in O.S.No.271 of 1976; grounds: death of sole petitioner S.P.Krishnan, legal heirs not brought on record, non-payment of batta despite repeated orders and warning of automatic dismissal; respondents R1 to R7 did not appear; no costs; connected CMPs closed.

What did the court decide?

The Civil Revision Petition is dismissed for default, the petitioner having shown no interest in prosecuting the matter despite orders dating back to 2022 requiring payment of batta and substitution of legal heirs of the deceased petitioner. ¶33

S.P.Krishnan Vs Tm Sivaramakrishnan (Died) — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

C.R.P.No.527 of 2013

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 04.08.2025

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR

¶6

C.R.P.No.527 of 2013 and

¶7

C.M.P.Nos.25135, 25154 & 25149 of 2023

¶8

S.P.Krishnan ... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

TM Sivaramakrishnan (died) Venkatachalam (died) 1.C.Premkumar Valliammal (died) 2.Kamalam 3.T.V.Sugunakumari

4.Rukmani

5.Mangayakarasi

6.Nidhiyanandam

7.T.Mohan ... Respondents

¶15

Prayer : Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure against the order of the Principal District Munsif Court at Tiruchengode, dismissing R.E.A.No.123 of 2011 in R.E.A.No.29 of 2009 in O.S.No.271 of 1976, dated 27.11.2012.

¶16

Page 1 of 6

¶17

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

¶18

C.R.P.No.527 of 2013

¶19

For Petitioner : M/s.V.Srimathi For R1 to R7 : No appearance

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

It is seen from the docket orders that this Court, by order dated 05.04.2022, has recorded the death of the revision petitioner and has directed the learned counsel for the petitioner to issue fresh notice to the respondents 2, 5 and 7. Thereafter, on 06.06.2022, the petitioner was directed to pay batta for R2, R5 and R7. Again, when the matter was taken up on 19.04.2022, there was no representation for the petitioner. Thereafter,

¶22

on 05.10.2023, this Court has passed the following order :

¶23

“ The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the sole petitioner had died and requested time for taking steps to bring the legal heirs of the deceased petitioner on record.

¶24

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to issue fresh notice to the respondents R2 to R5 & R7 through Court as well as privately, returnable by 31.10.2023.

¶25

3.The learned counsel for the Petitioner shall also pay batta within three Court working days excluding today into the

¶26

Page 2 of 6

¶27

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

¶28

C.R.P.No.527 of 2013

¶29

Registry in order to enable them to send Court notice to R2 to R5 & R7, failing which the Civil Revision Petition shall stand dismissed automatically without any further reference to this Court.

¶30

4.Post the matter on 31.10.2023. ”

¶31

2.Meanwhile, petitions to bring on legal heirs of the deceased

¶32

petitioner have been filed. However, despite ordering notice in those petitions, batta has not been paid till date and the matter is being adjourned from 2023 for payment of batta. Even today, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks an adjournment. Therefore, it is clear that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the matter. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to keep this matter pending any further.

¶33

3.Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed for default.

¶34

No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

04.08.2025

mkn

Page 3 of 6

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