Madras High CourtCMP(MD)/12128/2025allowed

1. C.Rajamani (Died) 2. Muthulakshmi v. 1. C.Arumugam (Died) 2. Devaraj

2025-10-24Honourable Mr Justice P.Vadamalai5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24-10-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE P.VADAMALAI in SA(MD) SR NO. 33594 of 2018 1.C.Rajamani (Died) 2.Muthulakshmi 3.Rajeshwari 4.Nagalakshmi 5.Murugesan 6.Chandrasekaran Petitioner(s) in all petitions Vs 1.C.Arumugam (Died) Innasi Ammal (Died) Lourdhu Mary (Died) 2.Devaraj 3.James 4.John 5.A.Kamaleswari 6.A.Andiyappan 1/5

7.T.Kaveri Ammal 8.Selvan @ Vinayagamoorthi 9.A.Chandramathi Respondent(s) in all petitions For Petitioner(s) in all petitions:

Mr.M.R.Sreenivasan, Advocate For Respondent(s) in all petitions :

Mr.C.Vakeeswaran, Advocate for R5, R6, R7 & R9 Common Prayer : Civil Miscellaneous Petitions are filed to condone the delay of 362 days in filing the petition to set aside the abatement caused due to the death of the 1st respondent/C.Arumugam, to set aside the abatement caused due to the death of the 1st respondent/C.Arumugam, and to bring on record the proposed respondent Nos.5 to 9 herein as the legal representatives of the deceased 1st respondent/C.Arumugam and rank them as respondent Nos.5 to 9 in C.M.P.(MD)No.10425 of 2025 in S.A.(MD)SR No.33594 of 2018.

COMMON ORDER These Civil Miscellaneous Petitions have been filed to condone the delay of 362 days in filing the petition to set aside the abatement caused due to the death of the 1st respondent/C.Arumugam, to set aside the abatement caused due to the death of the 1st respondent/C.Arumugam, 2/5

and to bring on record the proposed respondent Nos.5 to 9 herein as the legal representatives of the deceased 1st respondent/C.Arumugam and rank them as respondent Nos.5 to 9 in C.M.P.(MD)No.10425 of 2025 in S.A.(MD)SR No.33594 of 2018 on the file of this Court.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for respondent Nos.5, 6, 7 & 9, and I have perused the common affidavit filed in support of these petitions.

3. The learned counsel for respondent Nos.5, 6, 7 & 9 has filed a memo along with an affidavit, stating that the 8th respondent is a person with mental retardation and that the 8th respondent is represented by his mother/5th respondent herein. The said memo and affidavit are recorded.

4. The learned counsel for respondent Nos.5, 6, 7 & 9 has not raised any objection to allow these petitions. 3/5

5. Being satisfied with the reasons stated in the affidavit, these Civil Miscellaneous Petitions are allowed.

24-10-2025 (1/3) mkn 4/5

P.VADAMALAI, J.

mkn in SA(MD) SR NO. 33594 of 2018 24.10.2025 (1/3) 5/5