Madras High CourtCMP(MD)/1919/2020allowed

Manohar, v. Indirani,

2020-09-28Honourable Mr Justice S.S. Sundar3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Twenty Eighth day of September Two Thousand Twenty PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice S.S.SUNDAR IN CRP(MD) No.985 of 2019 MANOHAR ... PETITIONER/ PETITIONER Vs 1 INDIRANI 2 SUMATHI 3 SRI JESLI OVANS @ MANOJ KUMAR 4 SRI JESTRAM @ VIJAYA KUMAR 5 JEYANTHI 6 MAHAMAYEE 7 KANCHANA 8 KAVITHA 9 SRI ALAGAR(DIED) 10 SAKTHI 11 MALA 12 AMARAVATHY 13 SRI SURESH(DIED) 14 SRI RAJESH 15 JAYA 16 SUMATHI(DIED) 17 SRI VIMAL 18 PAWNTHAYEE 19 SIGAMANI @ KARUPPAYEE 20 R.VENKATESAN 21 N.RANI 22 R.SARAVANAN 23 V.AMAIYAPPAN 24 BALAMURUGAN 25 SUMATHI 26 ESWARI 27 MINOR.ALAGESWARI 28 MINOR.PANDIAMMAL ... RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS/ (RESPONDENTS 27 ,28 OF MINOR REPRESENT BY ITS GUARDIAN MOTHER AND NEXT FRIEND ESWARI R.26) 1/3

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to appoint any officer or pleader of this Honourable Court to be the guardian of the Minor Respondents 27 and 28 for the purpose of this CRP(MD)No.985 of 2019.

Prayer in CRP(MD)No.985 of 2019:

To call for the records and set aside the fair and decreetal dated 03.04.2019 in IA No.80 of 2018 in OS No.16 of 2012 on the file of the Additional District & Sessions Court, Theni & Periyakulam and allow this Civil Revision Petition.

ORDER : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Mr.H.LAKSHMI SHANKAR, Advocate for the petitioner, and Mr.C.JEGANATHAN for M/S.VEERA ASSOCIATES for the respondents 1 to 3 and the Respondents 5 to 28 not appeared either in person or by an Advocate, the Court made the following order:- This petition is filed to appoint any Officer or Pleader of this Court to be the guardian of the minor respondents 27 and 28 for the purpose of this Civil Revision Petition.

2.The Civil Revision Petition is filed by the plaintiff in the suit in O.S.No.16 of 2012 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Court, Theni. The revision petitioner filed an application for amendment of plaint to include three more items to the suit schedule. That application was dismissed. As against that, the above Civil Revision Petition is filed.

3.It is submitted that during the pendency of this Civil Revision Petition, 13th respondent in this Civil Revision Petition by name Suresh, died. The respondents, 26, 27 and 28 are the widow and minor children of the said Suresh namely 13th respondent. Though the 26th respondent is the natural guardian of the minors who are respondents 27 and 28, no intimation was given by the 26th respondent. However, the revision petitioner appears to have filed a petition to implead the legal heirs of the 13th respondent in the suit. Since the 13th respondent died after the revision petition was filed, the petitioner was constrained to implead the respondents 26 to 28 in this Civil Revision Petition.

Since respondents 27 and 28 are minors, the petitioner expected the mother/26th respondent to get herself appointed as guardian to defend the Civil Revision Petition on behalf of minors. However, no steps have been taken. In the said circumstances, the above petition is filed to appoint any officer or pleader of this Court to be the guardian of minors who are respondents 27 and 28, for the purpose of this lis namely this Civil Revision Petition. Despite notice to 26th respondent, no one has entered appearance for 26th respondent.

the party who has not engaged a counsel to conduct the suit cannot be trusted to protect the interest of minors. Therefore, this Court is of the view that an Advocate of this Court can be appointed as Counsel for the minors. Accordingly, Mr.A.Arumugam, Advocate, No.4/370, Lake Area, Karurvysya Bank Back Side, Near Mattuthavani, Madurai - 625 107 (Cell No.9443773415) is appointed to be the guardian of the minors/respondents 27 and 28 for the purpose of this Civil Revision Petition. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner is directed to hand over the full set of papers that is available/filed by the revision petitioner in this Civil Revision Petition.

The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner is expected to pay a reasonable remuneration to the officer of Court who has now been appointed as guardian of the minor to appear in the Civil Revision Petition on behalf of the minors. The petitioner is also directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) as the fee for the officer of the Court to do all reasonable things as guardian of minors, namely, the respondents 27 and 28. The learned Counsel further represented that no one has entered appearance though notice have been served on the counsels appearing for the respondents before the lower Court. It is submitted by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner that some of the respondents have not responded even after service of notice.

It is open to the petitioner to file a petition for substituted service by publication.

sd/- 28/09/2020 / TRUE COPY / / /2020 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, THENI AT PERIYAKULAM.

COPY TO: MR.A.ARUMUGAM, ADVOCATE, NO.4/370, LAKE AREA, KARURVYSYA BANK BACK SIDE, NEAR MATTUTHAVANI, MADURAI - 625 107 (CELL No.9443773415) +1 CC to M/s.H.LAKSHMI SHANKAR, Advocate ( SR-6698[I] dated 29/09/2020 ) ORDER IN IN CRP(MD) No.985 of 2019 Date :28/09/2020 SRM AE/AKM/SAR-I (01.10.2020) 3P 4C 3/3