S.Madheeswari v. Ammani Ammal

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 03.10.2 0 1 6

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUS TICE K.K.SA SIDHARAN C.R.P.(PD)No. 3067 of 2016 1.

S.Madheeswari 2.

N.Periyasamy 3.

S.Mani ...

Petitioners/Plaintiffs

Versus

1.

Ammani Ammal 2.

Dhanalakshmi ...

Respondents/Defendants PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India directing the District Munsif, Attur to number O.S.S.R.No. 4393 of 2016 dated 20.08.2016.

*** For Petitioners :

Mr. C.Prakasam

O R D E R The petitioners filed a suit before the trial Court against the respondents praying for a decree of declaration and injunction. The plaint was returned by the trial Court with certain remarks. The petitioners complied with those remarks and represented the plaint on 29.08.2016. The learned District Munsif, Attur, without considering the response again returned the plaint on the ground that previous returns were not complied with. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioners are before this Court.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. 3.

The learned trial Judge earlier returned the plaint with certain remarks. The petitioners duly represented the plaint with answers to the query raised by the trial Court. The trial Court once again returned the plaint on the ground that previous returns were not complied with, in its letter and spirit. 4.

The learned Judge while examining the plaint after re-presentation

by the petitioners, ought to have looked into the remarks made by them. The petitioners have given their own version with respect to the remarks made by the learned trial Judge while returning the plaint on previous occasions. The learned trial Judge was expected to consider the answers given by the petitioners to the query raised by the trial Court. The question of further returning the plaint again would arise only in case those reasons were not sufficient. I am therefore of the view that the learned trial Judge should consider the matter afresh. 5.

The learned trial Judge is directed to consider the remarks offered by the petitioners pursuant to the return dated 20.08.2016. The learned Trial Judge should pass a speaking order, taking into consideration the remarks made by the Court on 20.08.2016 and the reply submitted by the petitioners on 29.08.2016. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6.

The Civil Revision Petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs.

03.10.2016 vsg

To District Munsif, Attur.

K.K.SA SIDHARAN, J.

vsg C.R.P.(PD)No. 3067 of 2016 03.10.2 0 1 6