M. Venkatesan v. B.Murugan

CMP NO. 11058 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-07-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR CMP Nos.11058, 11062, 11071 & 11074 of 2025 in CRP.SR.Nos.101043, 101044, 101045 & 101046 of 2024 M. Venkatesan S/o. Mahalingam, Pannapatti Village and Post, Omalur Taluk, Salem District.

Appellant(s) Vs B.Murugan S/o. Baluchettiar, Pannapatti Village and Post, Omalur Taluk, Salem District.

Respondent(s) For Appellant(s):

T.S.Vijaya Raghavan For Respondent(s):

Zeenath Begum

ORDER

These petitions have been filed to condone the delay of 751, 200, 200, and 200 days in filing these present Civil Revision Petitions respectively.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had entrusted the case to his Advocate and he promised that he would look after the case. But he failed follow and only when police came in https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

search of him, he came to know about the Order of arrest in the Execution Petition. Hence, the delay is not on the part of the petitioner.

3. Denying the averments in the petition, it is the contention of the respondent in the counter that the petitioner was very much aware of the proceedings and he is putting the blame on his Advocate only in order to evade arrest.

4. Though reasons has not been convincingly explained for condoning such a huge delay, considering the fact that civil arrest has been ordered as against the revision petitioner and in order decide the Civil Revision Petition on merits, this Court is inclined to condone the delay. Accordingly, these petitions are Ordered and the delay is condoned. The registry is directed to number the Civil Revision Petitions and post before this Court on 29.07.2025.

The interim Order, already granted by this Court on 24.06.2025, shall continue till then.

10-07-2025 vrc To The District Munsif, Omalur https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis