Madras High CourtCRP/1243/2014dismissed for nonprosecution

P.Balasubramanian v. N.Srinivasan

2019-09-24Honourable Mr Justice R. Pongiappan4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 24.09.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.PONGIAPPAN and M.P.No. 1 of 2014

1. P.Balasubramanian (Died)

2. B.Gananambal

3. R.Deepadevi

4. S.Sabitha

5. H.Nandini Petitioners 2 to 5 brought on record as legal representative of the deceased sole petitioner vide order dated 02.01.2017 by RMJ made in M.P.

Nos.3 & 3 of 2015 in C.R.P.Nos.

1243 & 1244 of 2014 Petitioners 2 to 5 rep by their Power Agent R.Rajagopalan .... Petitioners in both petitions Vs

1. N.Srinivanan

2. S.Jagannathan .... Respondents in both petitions PRAYER in C.R.P.NPD.No.1243 of 2014: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of C.P.C., to set aside the order dated 18.02.2014 passed in C.M.P.No.135 of 2014 in A.S.No.177 of 2008 by the learned VII Additional Judge of the City Civil Court at Chennai and consequently to allow the petition to appoint a well experienced advocate to inspect the suit property and to submit the report as 1/4

observed and directed by this Court, in its judgment dated 27.07.2013 in S.A.No.217 of 2013 filed in C.M.P.No.135 of 2014 in A.S.No.177 of 2008.

PRAYER in C.R.P.NPD.No.1244 of 2014: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of C.P.C., to set aside the order dated 18.02.2014 passed in C.M.P.No.136 of 2014 in A.S.No.177 of 2008 by the learned VII Additional Judge of the City Civil Court at Chennai and consequently to allow the petition for rejecting the report dated 20.01.2014 of the Advocate Commissioner filed in C.M.P.No.136 of 2014 in A.S.No.177 of 2008.

For Petitioners in both petitions : No appearance For Respondents in both petitions : Mr.B.Raj kishore C O M M O N O R D E R On 13.09.2019, when these petitions were came up for hearing, there was no representation on the side of the petitioners. Hence, this Court directed the Registry to list both the petitions today, under the caption "For dismissal".

2. Today when these petition are came up for hearing, there was no representation on the side of the petitioners. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents alone is present. 2/4

3. Hence in view of the fact that the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners is regularly absent for arguing the matter, both the Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed as non prosecution. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs. 24.09.2019 Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Speaking / Non Speaking order rts To The VII Additional City Civil Court Chennai.

3/4

R.PONGIAPPAN, J.

rts and M.P.No. 1 of 2014 24.09.2019 4/4