← Library
Madras High CourtCRP/2218/2013dismissed

Pazhaniappan v. Vinayagam@ Siva

2016-02-15Honourable Dr. Justice S. Vimala4 pages

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 15.02.2016 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE Dr.JUSTICE S.VIMALA CRP (NPD) No.2218 of 2013 and MP.No.1 of 2013 Pazhaniappan S/o. Manickasamy Mudaliar No.77, Rozario Street, Pondicherry - 3.

... Petitioner Vs Vinayagam @ Siva S/o. Late Swaminathan @ Ramasamy No.7, Kali Koil Street Thelaspet, Pondicherry - 605 009.

... Respondent PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code praying to set aside the fair and final order dated 17.08.2011 made in I.A.No.178/2011 in I.A.No.294/2006 in O.S.No.356 of 2003 on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Puducherry.

For Petitioner :

No Appearance For Respondent :

Mr.R.Muralidharan

ORDER

The Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the revision petitioner/defendant seeking to set aside the dismissal order passed in I.A.No.178/2011 in I.A.No.294 of 2006 in O.S.No.356 of 2003 dated 17.08.2011 on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Puducherry.

1.1. The defendant filed an application to set aside the exparte decree along with an application to condone the delay in I.A.No.294 of 2006. For non-appearance, the application to condone the delay in I.A.No.294 of 2006 was dismissed. Praying to set aside the dismissal order, another application was filed along with an application to condone the delay of 115 days in I.A.No.178 of 2011. That petition was dismissed. Challenging the same, revision petition has been filed.

2. The learned counsel for the respondent herein has filed a memo dated 08.07.2015 stating that the respondent/plaintiff has passed away on 14.11.2014, leaving behind his wife Sundarambal and daughter Uma Devi as legal representatives. Notice has been served on the learned counsel for the petitioner on 08.07.2015. Thereafter, when the matter was taken up, a representation was made regarding the pendency of this memo and non-filing of the application by the revision petitioner/defendant to implead the legal representatives of the deceased sole respondent. At the request of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner/defendant, ten days time was granted to file the impleading petition.

3. Today, when the matter is taken up, neither the application to implead the legal representatives has been filed nor the reasons for nonfiling of the same has been adduced.

4. Under such circumstances, when no steps have been taken to implead the legal representatives of the respondent, the Civil Revision Petition cannot be taken up for hearing. Therefore, the revision petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.

15.02.2016 ds/ogy To:

The II Additional District Judge Puducherry.

S.VIMALA ,J., ds CRP (NPD) No.2218 of 2013 15.02.2016