Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. Sathish Kumar, J
Marayee – Appellant
Versus
Ponnammal (Died) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. condonation of delay application dismissed initially. (Para 1) |
| 2. discussion of the procedural background and circumstances of appeal. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court discussion on the importance of substantial justice over limitation. (Para 8 , 10) |
| 4. the law of limitation must balance public policy interests with individual rights in justice. (Para 9) |
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the learned Principal District Judge, whereby the application filed under Order XLI Rule 3A of the Code of Civil Procedure and Section 5 of the Limitation Act, seeking condonation of a delay of 189 days in presenting the appeal suit against the judgement and decree dated 07.03.2014, was dismissed.
2. The revision petitioners are the appellants in the unnumbered appeal suit and were arrayed as defendants 1 and 5 in the original suit. The first respondent is the first respondent in the unnumbered appeal suit and was the plaintiff in the suit. Respondents 2 to 4 in this revision petition are also respondents 2 to 4 in the unnumbered appeal suit and were defendants 2 to 4 in the suit.
3. The suit was filed for a judgment and decree declarin
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
