Allowed¶19

1. a.Paulayan (Died) 2. Chellammal (Died) 3. Justin Jeyakumar, v. Mary Kala

Madras HC2 Apr 2026CMP(MD)/2072/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay 1646 days; Second Appeal SA(MD)Sr.No.69828 of 2019; settlement deed allegedly not executed / brought about by fraud; concurrent findings of Courts below validated settlement deed; appellants in possession; petition allowed subject to cost of Rs.5,000/- to Chief Justice Relief Fund, Madras High Court, Madurai; compliance reporting 16.04.2026; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; Justice P.B. Balaji; CMP(MD). No.2072 of 2025; respondents no appearance.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 1646 days in filing the Second Appeal in SA(MD)Sr.No.69828 of 2019 condoned, subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- cost to the Chief Justice Relief Fund within two weeks; matter to be posted for reporting compliance on 16.04.2026. ¶19

1. a.Paulayan (Died) 2. Chellammal (Died) 3. Justin Jeyakumar, Vs Mary Kala — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

CMP(MD). No.2072 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

Dated : 02/04/2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI

¶6

CMP(MD). No.2072 of 2025 in SA(MD)Sr.No.69828 of 2019

¶7

1. A.Paulayan (Died) 2. Chellammal (died) 3. Justin Jeyakumar 4. P.Antony Stella Bai ... Petitioners Vs 1. Mary Kala 2. S.Sushmi (Minor), 3. Sajin Zagar (Minor) Minors rep. by R1 4. P.Robin Devakumar, 5. C. Letus,, (Cause titled accepted and amended vide order dated 21.02.2023) ... Respondents PRAYER :- To Condone the delay of 1646 days in filing the Second Appeal in SA(MD). SR No.69828 of 2019. For Petitioners : M/s.S.C.Herold Singh, For Respondents : No appearance

¶8

ORDER

¶9

This petition has been filed to condone a delay of 1646 days in

¶10

1/2

¶11

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

¶12

CMP(MD). No.2072 of 2025

¶13

filing the above Second Appeal.

¶14

Though the respondents have been served and their names have

¶15

also been printed in the cause list, they have not chosen to enter appearance either in person or through counsel.

¶16

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. I have also gone through the affidavit filed in support of the petition for condonation of delay.

¶17

The petitioners challenge the concurrent findings of the Courts below validating the settlement deed executed by the husband of the first appellant. It is stated that the appellants are in possession of the property, and even in the written statement, the deceased first defendant in the suit had asserted that he had not executed any settlement deed in favour of the plaintiff and that the same had been brought about by fraud.

¶18

In the light of the substantial interest of the appellants involved, this Court is inclined to condone the delay, subject to conditions.

¶19

Accordingly, this petition is allowed on condition that the petitioners shall pay a cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) to the credit of the Hon’ble Chief Justice Relief Fund, Madras High Court, Madurai, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶20