Disposed¶31

S.R.Lali v. Karunakaran

Madras HC10 Feb 2025CRP(MD)/301/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Article 227 - direction for time-bound disposal - O.S.No.332 of 2013, II Additional District Munsif Court, Kuzhithurai - permanent injunction suit - interim applications I.A.Nos.4 to 7 of 2024 pending - plaintiff's evidence closed 18.01.2024 - trial Court cannot be blamed for delay caused by plaintiff's own applications - interim applications to be disposed of on or before 30.04.2025 - CRP disposed of, no costs - R. Vijayakumar J - 10.02.2025.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the II Additional District Munsif Court, Kuzhithurai to dispose of I.A.Nos.4 to 7 of 2024 in O.S.No.332 of 2013 on or before 30.04.2025; Civil Revision Petition disposed of with no costs. ¶31

S.R.Lali Vs Karunakaran — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the High Court should direct the District Munsif (II Additional District Munsif Court, Kuzhithurai) to dispose of O.S.No.332 of 2013, in which the interim applications I.A.Nos.4 to 7 of 2024 were pending, within a time fixed by the Court.

¶10

Court's answer

The trial Court cannot be blamed for not proceeding with the trial, since the applications filed by the plaintiff himself (I.A.Nos.4 to 7 of 2024) are pending before it.

¶26

Ratio / Principle

The trial Court is directed to dispose of I.A.Nos.4 to 7 of 2024 on or before 30.04.2025.

¶29

Key takeaways

With the above directions, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of with no costs.ratio¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the plaintiff in O.S.No.332 of 2013 (suit for permanent injunction over a suit schedule shop, II Additional District Munsif Court, Kuzhithurai) seeking a time-bound direction for disposal. Interim injunction had been granted pending suit; the plaintiff thereafter filed four interim applications - I.A.No.4 of 2024 (to punish the defendant for violation of the injunction), I.A.No.5 of 2024 (not to induct any tenant), I.A.No.6 of 2024 (to handover possession) and I.A.No.7 of 2024 (to implead a third party claiming title). The 'B' diary extract showed the plaintiff's side evidence stood closed on 18.01.2024 and the defendants had not yet let in evidence because of the pendency of these applications. Held, the trial Court cannot be blamed for not proceeding with the trial while the plaintiff's own applications were pending; the trial Court was directed to dispose of I.A.Nos.4 to 7 of 2024 on or before 30.04.2025. Civil Revision Petition disposed of with no costs. (R. Vijayakumar, J.; decision dated 10.02.2025)

¶1

C.R.P.(PD)(MD).No.301 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 10.02.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR C.R.P.(PD)(MD).No.301 of 2025

S.R.Lali

... Petitioner

-vs-

Karunakaran ...Respondent

¶10

PRAYER: The Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to direct the District Munsif to dispose O.S.No.332 of 2013 on the file of the II Additional District Munsif Court, Kuzhithurai within a time fixed by this Court by allowing this civil revision petition.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Selvan

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

The plaintiff in O.S.No.332 of 2013 on the file of the II Additional District Munsif Court, Kuzhithurai is the revision petitioner.

¶14

2.The said suit was filed for the relief of permanent injunction

¶15

not to disturb his possession over the suit schedule shop and from evicting

¶16

1/4

¶17

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

¶18

C.R.P.(PD)(MD).No.301 of 2025

¶19

the plaintiff by force.

¶20

3.The plaint averments reveal that the plaintiff is the subtenant of the defendant and the original owner is one Basan Shanthini. According to the plaintiff, the defendant is attempting to disturb his possession. Pending suit, an order of interim injunction was granted in favour of the plaintiff.

¶21

4.It is the further contention of the plaintiff that the said interim injunction order was violated by the defendant and he was forcibly evicted from the property. Therefore, the plaintiff had filed I.A.No.4 of 2024 to punish the defendant. I.A.No.5 of 2024 was filed seeking interim injunction not to induct any tenant into the property. I.A.No.6 of 2024 has been filed seeking interim injunction to handover possession of the property to the plaintiff. I.A.No.7 of 2024 has been filed to implead a third party who is claiming title over the suit schedule property. Since all the interim applications are pending, the trial Court has not proceeded with the trial. Hence, the present civil revision petition.

¶22

5.A perusal of 'B' diary extract reveals that the plaintiff's side evidence was closed on 18.01.2024. So far the defendants have not let in evidence in view of the pendency of I.A.Nos.4 to 7 of 2024. The trial

¶23

2/4

¶24

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

¶25

C.R.P.(PD)(MD).No.301 of 2025

¶26

Court cannot be blamed for not proceeding with the trial, in view of the fact that the applications filed by the plaintiff are pending.

¶27