Madras High CourtCRP(MD)/930/2011dismissed

K.Natarajan, v. S.Muniasamy Konar

2022-02-16Honourable Mrs Justice S.Ananthi (Retd.)3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 16.02.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI C.R.P(MD)No.930 of 2011 & MP(MD)No.1 of 2011 K.Natarajan ... Petitioner Vs.

1.S.Muniasamy konar 2.Pichaiammal 3.Paulchamy 4.Senthil 5.Irulappan (alias) Rajangam 6.Avudaithangam 7.Subramaniyapillai 8.Deivendran 9.Tharmalingakonar 10.Murugasen 11.Muthupandiyan 12.Chelliahpillai 13.Manimuthu 14.Thangaraj 15.Mookandipillai 16.Ramasamypillai 17.Murugesan 18.Mariammal 19.Tamilarasan 20.Sankaralingampillai 21.Muthiahkonar 22.Alagarkonar 23.Gopal 24.Selvam 25.Muthumurugan 26.Kannan 27.Santhanamariyammal 28.Gurusamy 29.Murugesan 30.Jegadeeswaran 31.Rajendran 32.Muthukalaikonar 33.Krishnamurthy 34.Dass 35.Paramasivapillai 36.Annathaiammal 37.Ramamoorthy 38.Dhanushkodiammal ... Respondents PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the fair and final order dated 1/3

07.12.2009 in IA.No.58/2009 in OS.No.92/2007 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Virudhunagar.

For Petitioner :Mr.A.Sivaji For Respondents :Mr.G.Mariappan for R8, R24, R30, R31 No appearance for R1 to R7, R9 to R23, R25 to R29, R32 to R38

ORDER

This revision petition is filed to set aside the order dated 07.12.2009 in IA.No.58/2009 in OS.No.92/2007 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Virudhunagar.

2. IA.No.58/2009 was filed by the petitioner / plaintiff to amend the value of the suit property. The IA was dismissed by the learned District Munsif, Virudhunagar on 07.12.2009. Challenging the said dismissal order, the petitioner / plaintiff has come up with this revision.

3. Heard the learned counsels appearing on both sides and perused the materials on record.

4. The above said IA was dismissed on 07.12.2009 and on the same date, the plaint was returned for presentation before appropriate Court. Till date, the petitioner / plaintiff has neither filed any appeal against the return of plaint nor represented the plaint before appropriate Court. The petitioner / plaintiff either ought to have questioned the return of plaint or represented the plaint before appropriate Court as directed by the learned District Munsif, Virudhunagar. Without doing so, the petitioner / plaintiff cannot file the present revision petition challenging the order passed in the amendment petition. Furthermore, at present, there is no suit pending. Hence, this Civil Revision Petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. However, if the suit is restored to file, the petitioner / plaintiff is at liberty to file a fresh application for amendment. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-I) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) 2/3

mbi To The District Munsif Court, Virudhunagar Copy to The Section Officer,V.R.Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.(2 copies) +1 CC to M/s.G.MARIAPPAN, Advocate ( SR-6610[F] dated 16/02/2022 ) C.R.P(MD)No.

16.02.2022 VR(CO) TR(07.03.2022) 3P 4C 3/3