Madras High CourtCMP(MD)/9379/2025allowed

D.Rajaseeli, v. A.Anjalo Jeyapaul,(Died) 2. S.Punitha

2025-11-04Honourable Mr Justice P.Vadamalai3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 04.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE P.VADAMALAI in S.A(MD)No.755 of 2016 D.Rajaseeli W/o.Iruthayaraj ... Petitioner in all CMPs Vs.

1.A.Anjalo Jeyapaul (Died) ...

..../Sole Respondent 2.S.Punitha 3.A.Triphi ... Respondents 2 & 3/Proposed Respondents 2 & 3 / LRs of the deceased sole respondent in all CMPs For Petitioner : Mr.H.Arumugam For R2 : Ms.S.Punitha Party-in-person R3 : No Appearance PRAYER in CMP(MD)No.9379 of 2025: This Petition is filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act, to condone the delay of 877 days in filing the petition to set aside the abatement caused due to the death of the sole respondent namely A.Anjalo Jeyapaul in S.A(MD)No.755 of 2016. 1/3

PRAYER in CMP(MD)No.9380 of 2025: This Petition is filed under Order 22 Rule 9 r/w Section 151 of CPC., to set aside the abatement caused due to the death of sole respondent namely A.Anjalo Jeyapaul in S.A(MD)No.755 of 2016.

PRAYER in CMP(MD)No.9381 of 2025: This Petition is filed under Order 22 Rule 3(1) r/w Rule 11 of CPC., to bring the respondents 2 & 3 on record as legal representatives of the deased sole respondent namely A.Anjalo Jeyapaul and rank them as respondents 2 & 3 in S.A(MD)No.755 of 2016. COMMON ORDER CMP(MD)No.9379 of 2025 has been filed to condone the delay of 877 days in filing the petition to set aside the abatement caused due to the death of the sole respondent namely A.Anjalo Jeyapaul in S.A(MD)No.755 of 2016.

2. CMP(MD)No.9380 of 2025 has been filed to set aside the abatement caused due to the death of sole respondent namely A.Anjalo Jeyapaul in S.A(MD)No.755 of 2016.

3. CMP(MD)No.9381 of 2025 has been filed seeking to bring on record the respondents 2 & 3 as legal representatives of the deased sole 2/3

respondent namely A.Anjalo Jeyapaul and rank them as respondents 2 & 3 in S.A(MD)No.755 of 2016.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The second respondent appeared in person and submitted that she has no objection to allow these petitions.

3. I have perused the affidavits filed in support of these petitions and being satisfied with the reasons stated in the affidavits and considering the no objection submitted by the second respondent, these petitions are allowed.

4. Registry is directed to carry out necessary amendments in the main Second Appeal and list the matter on 05.12.2025. 04.11.2025 VSD 3/3