Mariappan v. v. Sankaran

Madras HC28 Jan 2025CRP(MD)/2805/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench; C.R.P(MD)Nos.2805 and 2806 of 2024 with CMP(MD).No.15830 of 2024; decided 28.01.2025 by K. Govindarajan Thilakavadi J.; revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against orders dated 26.09.2024 in I.A.Nos. 3 and 4 of 2024 in O.S.No.39 of 2022, District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Shenkottai; ex parte decree passed on 07.11.2024; interim stay of High Court not communicated to trial court; trial court report dated 24.01.2025; nothing survives for adjudication; petitions closed, no costs; parties Mariappan (petitioner/defendant, counsel H. Arumugam) v. V. Sankaran (respondent/plaintiff, counsel R. Sai Aravind).

What did the court decide?

Both Civil Revision Petitions closed as nothing survived for adjudication, with no costs; the connected Miscellaneous Petition (CMP(MD).No.15830 of 2024) also closed.

Mariappan Vs v. Sankaran — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Both Civil Revision Petitions closed as nothing survived for adjudication, with no costs; the connected Miscellaneous Petition (CMP(MD).No.15830 of 2024) also closed.

¶¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the fair and decreetal order dated 26.09.2024 in I.A.Nos. 3 and 4 of 2024 in O.S.No.39 of 2022 passed by the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Shenkottai called for interference in these Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

¶¶10

Court's answer

On perusal of the trial Court's report dated 24.01.2025, this Court found that the Presiding Officer was not informed about the stay order passed by this Court and hence proceeded with the suit and passed the Judgment.

¶¶21

Ratio / Principle

Since the Presiding Officer proceeded on the basis that no stay had been communicated, nothing survives for adjudication in these Civil Revision Petitions.

¶¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Revision Petitions (C.R.P(MD)Nos.2805 and 2806 of 2024) under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, filed by the defendant against the fair and decreetal order dated 26.09.2024 in I.A.Nos. 3 and 4 of 2024 in O.S.No.39 of 2022 on the file of the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Shenkottai, were closed by the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court (K. Govindarajan Thilakavadi J.). On a submission that an ex parte decree had been passed in the suit despite a memo filed by the petitioner, the High Court called for remarks; the trial Judge reported (24.01.2025) that on the date of pronouncing judgment (07.11.2024) neither the defendant's advocates informed the court nor filed any memo about the case pending before the High Court or any interim stay granted by it. On perusal of the report, the High Court held that the Presiding Officer was not informed of the stay order and had therefore proceeded with the suit and passed judgment; nothing surviving for adjudication, the petitions were closed with no costs and the connected Miscellaneous Petition (CMP(MD).No.15830 of 2024) was also closed.

¶1

CRP(MD).Nos.2805 and 2806 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 28.01.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI

¶6

C.R.P(MD)Nos.2805 and 2806 of 2024 and CMP(MD).No.15830 of 2024

¶7

Mariappan : Petitioner / defendant in both cases

¶8

Vs.

¶9

V. Sankaran : Respondent / plaintiff in both cases

¶10

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the fair and decreetal order, passed in I.A.Nos. 3 and 4 of 2024 in O.S.No.39 of 2022, dated 26.09.2024 on the file of the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Shenkottai.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.H. Arumugam in both CRPs. For Respondent : Mr.R.Sai Aravind in both CRPs

¶12

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

¶13

CRP(MD).Nos.2805 and 2806 of 2024

¶14

COMMON ORDER

¶15

These Civil Revision Petitions are filed against the fair and decreetal order, dated 26.09.2024 passed in I.A.Nos. 3 and 4 of 2024 in O.S.No.39 of 2022, on the file of the District Munsif-Cum-Judicial Magistrate, Shenkottai.

¶16

When the matters are taken up for hearing on 20.01.2025, the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner / defendant submitted that in spite of the memo filed by the petitioner before the trial Court, the learned trial Judge has passed the ex parte decree in the above said suit in O.S.No.39 of 2022. Hence, this Court called for remarks from the trial Court.

¶17

The learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Shencottai sent a report, dated 24.01.2025, wherein, it has been stated that on the date of pronouncing the Judgment i.e., on 07.11.2024 neither the defendant's Advocates informed nor filed any memo about the case pending before this Court or any interim stay granted by this Court.

¶18

On perusal of the report it is made clear that, the Presiding Officer

¶19

2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶20

CRP(MD).Nos.2805 and 2806 of 2024

¶21

was not informed about the stay order passed by this Court and hence, he has proceeded with suit and passed the Judgment. In such circumstances, nothing survives for adjudication in these Civil Revision Petitions.

¶22