Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.SAKTHIVEL
J. Gopalakrishnan, S/o. R.Janakiraman – Appellant
Versus
P. Navaneethakrishna Raj, S/o. Purushothaman – Respondent
ORDER :
R.SAKTHIVEL, J.
1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950, praying to strike off the plaint in O.S. No.394 of 2022 on the file of the III Additional District Munsif Court, Coimbatore, by the defendants 1 to 7 therein.
2. The revision petitioners 1 to 7 herein are the defendants 1 to 7 in the Suit in O.S. No.394 of 2022. The respondents 1 to 6 herein are the plaintiffs and the 7th respondent - trust herein is the 8th defendant therein.
3. Mrs.V.Srimathi, learned Counsel for the revision petitioners would submit that, earlier, seventh respondent - trust filed a Suit in O.S. No.1380 of 2014 against the revision petitioners and one V.Prakash. The said Suit was decreed by the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore. Assailing the Judgment and Decree passed therein, the revision petitioners herein / defendants therein filed an appeal in A.S. No.39 of 2017 on the file of the learned District Judge, Coimbatore. After a complete trial, the learned IV Additional District & Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, allowed the appeal and set aside the Judgment and Decree passed in O.S.No.1380 of 2014. Subsequently, the plaintiff in O.S.No.1380
The court emphasized that claims of vexatious suits should be resolved in trial, not through premature revisions, affirming procedural adherence in civil litigation.
The High Court affirmed that suits filed under different causes of action are not barred by procedural rules, highlighting the need for trial when a triable issue exists.
A party cannot re-litigate issues that have been previously adjudicated, as this constitutes an abuse of the court's process, particularly when the previous suit was dismissed and the current suit se....
The Court emphasized the need for restraint in exercising the power under Article 227 and the basic right of institution of a suit.
The main legal point established is that the invocation of Article 227 of the Constitution of India to strike off a plaint requires extraordinary circumstances and is not maintainable when an alterna....
The petitioners can be permitted to withdraw the suit to file a fresh suit, and they are liable to satisfy the law of limitation while filing the fresh suit.
The court can strike off a plaint as an abuse of process when it constitutes re-litigation of previously settled matters, thereby preventing unnecessary litigation.
Re-litigating the same issue which has already been tried and decided earlier against a party amounts to an abuse of the process of Court.
Belated filing of petitions without valid reasons and allowing suit proceedings to progress without raising objections earlier may lead to dismissal of revision petitions.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
