Madras High CourtCRP(MD)/1126/2011dismissed as infructuous

Robert Raj v. K.Jothikumar

2019-07-29Honourable Mr Justice S.S. Sundar2 pages

C.R.P.(NPD)(MD).No.1126 of 2011 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29.07.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S. SUNDAR C.R.P.(NPD)(MD).No.1126 of 2011 and M.P.(MD).No.3 of 2011 1.Robert Raj 2.Nagamani .. Petitioners/Petitioners/ Defendants 3 & 4 Vs.

1.K.Jothikumar 2.Seetha .. Respondents 1 & 2/Respondents 1 & 2/ Plaintiff 1 & 2 Thomson(died) Enoss(died) 3.Amalraj 4.Paulraj 5.Annipayan 6.Anbumani 7.Vincent 8.Paulsundarraj 9.Paul Rethinaraj .. Respondents 3 to 9/Respondents 3 to 11/ Defendants 1,2,5 to 11 10.Muthammal 11.Daniel 12.Sthanislas 13.Thambiraj 14.Rajam 15.Lourdhumary 16.Thangarani .. Respondents 10 to 16/Addl. Respondents 12 to 18/ Additional Defendants 12 to 18 Kamalam (died) 17.Indira .. Respondent No.17/Respondents 19 & 20/ Additional Defendants 19 & 20 (Respondents 3 to 17 are not necessary parties. They are given up) Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, against the fair and decreetal order, dated 05.03.2010 passed in E.A.No.143 of 2009 in E.P.No.139 of 2006 in O.S.No.390 of 1998 on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif, Kuzhithurai and set aside the same. For Petitioners : Mr.V.Sasikumar For Respondents : Mr.B.Christopher for R1 and R2 R3 to R17 - Given Up https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

C.R.P.(NPD)(MD).No.1126 of 2011

ORDER

The defendants No.3 and 4 in the suit in O.S.No.390 of 1998 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Kuzhithurai, are the revision petitioners.

2.Pursuant to the decree for recovery of possession, the plaintiff in the suit filed Execution petition in E.P.No.139 of 2006 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Kuzhithurai. When the execution petition was filed, the revision petitioners filed a petition in E.A.No.143 fo 2009 not to record delivery. The said petition was dismissed. As against the dismissal, the revision petitioners have preferred the above civil revision petition.

3.Today, when the matter is taken up hearing, it is stated that delivery was recorded by the execution Court. In such circumstances, the learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the revision petition has become infructuous. 4.Accordingly, this civil revision petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-I) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS ) To 1.The Principal District Munsif, Kuzhithurai.

2. The Section Officer, V.R.Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.(2 copies) C.R.P.(NPD)(MD).No.1126 of 2011 29.07.2019 TM AE/(22.08.2019) 2P 4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2