Madras High CourtCRP/2394/2017dismissed

M.Kamalakannan v. K.Govindarajan

2017-08-09Honourable Mr Justice M. Govindaraj4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 09.08.2017 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M. GOVINDARAJ C.R.P.(PD) NO.2394 OF 2017 AND CMP NO.11281 OF 2017 M.Kamalakannan ...

Petitioner Vs.

1.K.Govindarajan 2.M.Bhuvaneswaran 3.S.Revathi 4.S.Loganayagi 5.S.Geetha 6.S.Manickam ...

Respondents PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the fair and decreetal order passed in I.A.No.5667 of 2016 in I.A.No.13795 of 2015 in O.S.No.7178 of 2010 dated 07.11.2016 by the III Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.

For Petitioner :

Mr.S.N.Narasimhulu

O R D E R

This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 07.11.2016 passed in I.A.No.5667 of 2016 in I.A.No.13795 of 2015 in O.S.No.7178 of 2010, dismissing the petition filed under Order IX Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Code to restore the condone delay petition filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

2. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit stating that the petition was filed with an intention to protract the proceedings.

3. There were several litigations on the same issue, between the same parties. From the perusal of the plaint, it is seen that the suit is filed for a declaration to declare that the first respondent / first defendant is illegally occupied the suit property and also sought for delivery of possession to the petitioner / plaintiff. The third defendant is the brother of the plaintiff, on whose behalf also, the prayer was sought. The relief sought for can be agitated by the plaintiff even in the absence of the third defendant. The reason stated in filing the petition under Order IX Rule of the Civil Procedure Code is not convincing and the order

passed by the Trial Court dismissing the petition will not prejudice the petitioner / plaintiff in any way.

4. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Civil Revision Petition merits no consideration and accordingly, the same stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected civil miscellaneous petition is closed.

09.08.2017 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No TK To The III Additional Judge City Civil Court Chennai.

M.GOVINDARAJ, J.

TK C.R.P.(PD) NO.2394 OF 2017 09.08.2017