Dismissed¶20

Ramamoorthy, v. Annamalai

High Court of Judicature at Madras – CRP No.66 of 2026 & CMP.No.195 of 2026

Madras HC17 Jul 2026CRP/66/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay of 1366 days; ex-parte preliminary decree; final decree in I.A.No.159 of 2020 dated 30.06.2023; allotment in final decree disputed; O.S.No.72 of 2019, Principal District Judge, Cuddalore; dismissal of I.A.No.1001 of 2023 dated 04.09.2025; Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India; nothing survives in revision; CRP dismissed, no costs, connected CMP closed; Madras High Court; Justice P.B. Balaji; 17.07.2026.

What did the court decide?

Since the final decree has already been passed, nothing survives for consideration in this revision. ¶19

Ramamoorthy, Vs Annamalai — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17.07.2026

¶2

CORAM

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI

¶4

CRP No.66 of 2026 & CMP.No.195 of 2026

¶5

1.Ramamoorthy 2.Rajinikanth 3.Gopinath

¶6

..Petitioner

¶7

¶8

Annamalai ..Respondent

¶9

Prayer: Civil Revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and final order dated 04.09.2025 passed in I.A.No.1001 of 2023 in O.S.No.72 of 2019 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Cuddalore.

¶10

For Petitioner(s): M/s.D.Jeevitha For Respondent(s): Mr.D.Ravichander

¶11

ORDER

¶12

The present revision has been filed, challenging the order dismissing I.A.No.1001 of 2023, in and by which, the petitioner sought for condonation of delay of 1366 days in seeking to set aside the ex-parte preliminary decree in O.S.No.72 of 2019 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Cuddalore.

¶13

Page1 of 3

¶14

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

¶15

2.Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶16

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner states that subsequent to the

¶17

preliminary decree, a final decree has been passed in I.A.No.159 of 2020 in O.S.No.72 of 2019 on 30.06.2023 and that the petitioner is not agreeable to the

¶18

allotment that has been made to the petitioner in the said final decree.

¶19

4.In any event, if the petitioner is agreed to the final decree, it was open to the petitioner to have challenged the final decree in the manner known to law. Admittedly, the present application seeking condonation of delay was only in respect of the preliminary decree passed. In the light of the fact that the final decree has already been passed, nothing survives for consideration in this revision.

¶20

5.In fine, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. Connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶21

17.07.2026

¶22

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No ATA To The Principal District Judge, Cuddalore.

¶23

__________ Page2 of 3

¶24

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

¶25

P.B.BALAJI, J.