Allowed¶42

Velmayil v. Maleeha

Madras HC4 Mar 2026CMP(MD)/18207/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay - 26 days' delay in filing Appeal Suit in A.S.(MD)SR No.92099 of 2025 - CMP(MD) No. 18207 of 2025 allowed by Madras High Court, Madurai Bench (P. Vadamalai, J.) on 04-03-2026 on affidavit reasons - no objection from respondents 1 and 2, only formal objection from respondents 3 to 5 - petitioners Velmayil and Ramalingam v. respondents Maleeha, Petchimuthu, State Bank of India (Srivaikundam Branch), Tahsildar Srivaikundam Taluk (Tuticorin District) and District Collector, Thoothukudi District.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of the delay of 26 days in filing the Appeal Suit in A.S.(MD)SR No.92099 of 2025; the Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. ¶42

Velmayil Vs Maleeha — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

CMP(MD) NO. 18207 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 04-03-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE P.VADAMALAI

¶6

CMP(MD) NO. 18207 of 2025 IN

¶7

AS(MD) SR NO. 92099 of 2025

1.Velmayil

2.Ramalingam

Petitioner(s)

1.Maleeha

2.Petchimuthu

3.State Bank of India, Srivaikundam Branch, Through its Branch Manager.

¶15

4.Tahsildar, Srivaikundam Taluk, Tuticorin District.

¶16

5.The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Collectorate, Korampallam, Tuticorin.

¶17

Respondent(s)

¶18

1/4

¶19

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

¶20

CMP(MD) NO. 18207 of 2025

¶21

For Petitioner(s):

¶22

Mr.R.J.Karthick, Advocate

¶23

For Respondent(s):

¶24

Mr.G.Mohan Kumar, Advocate for R1

¶25

Mr.M.Gnanagurunathan, Advocate for R2

¶26

Mr.M.Ponniah, Advocate for R3

¶27

Mr.K.R.Badurus Zaman, Government Advocate for R4 & R5

¶28

Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed to condone the delay of 26 days in filing an appeal.

¶29

ORDER

¶30

This Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed to condone the

¶31

delay of 26 days in filing the Appeal Suit in A.S.(MD)SR No.92099 of

¶32

2025 before this Court.

¶33

Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused

¶34

the affidavit filed in support of this petition.

¶35

2/4

¶36

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

¶37

CMP(MD) NO. 18207 of 2025

¶38

The learned counsel for the 1^st respondent and the learned

¶39

counsel for the 2^nd respondent have not raised any objection to this petition.

¶40

The learned counsel for the 3^rd respondent and the learned Government Advocate for the 4^th & 5^th respondents have raised only formal objection to this petition.

¶41