SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(Mad) 1787

M.CHOCKALINGAM
P. Sakthivel – Appellant
Versus
Ponnusamy – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:N. Manokaran, Advocate. For the Respondent:P. Thangavel, Advocate.

Judgment :-

An order of dismissal of an application by the District Munsif, Sathyamangalam, made in I.A.No.840 of 2005 to condone the delay of 258 days in making re-presentation of the plaint, is the subject matter of challenge before this Court.

2.The Court heard the learned Counsel on either side.

3.It was a suit for recovery of money filed by the revision petitioner-plaintiff. The Court fee was Rs.7,500.50. The plaint was presented on 2. 2005 with the Court fee of Rs.10/-, and the deficit Court fee is to be paid. The plaintiff was returned on 12. 2005 stipulating two weeks time for payment of rest of the Court fee, but not done so. Subsequently, the plaint was re-presented on 111. 2005 along with an application to condone the delay of 258 days in making the payment of the Court fee. The said application was dismissed. Hence, this revision has been brought forth by the plaintiff.

4.The learned Counsel for the plaintiff would submit that it is true that the application was not filed within the period of two weeks time; that the Court fee has also not been paid; but, the Court was not powerless; that under Sec.151 of CPC, the application was filed; and that under the circumstances,




Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top