##PAGE1##

C.M.P.(MD)No.10457 of 2025

in Cros. Obj(MD)SR.No.46352 of 2025

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Reserved on : 19.01.2026

Pronounced on : 28.01.2026

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR

C.M.P.(MD)No.10457 of 2025

in Cros.Obj(MD)SR.No.46352 of 2025

in S.A.(MD)No.34 of 2019

and

Cros.Obj(MD)SR.No.46352 of 2025

in S.A.(MD)No.34 of 2019

1.Ganapathy (Died)

2.Sankaran

3.S.Sundararajan

(Cross Objectors 2 & 3 are brothers of deceased

1^st Cross Objector)

4.Janaki (Died)

5.Bakeerathi

6.P.Kumar

7.R.Baskaran

8.R.Buvaneswaran

(Respondents 6 to 8 are legal heirs of deceased

4^th Cross Objector) ... Petitioners/

Cross Objectors

Vs.

1/12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/02/2026 03:11:30 pm )

C.M.P.(MD)No.10457 of 2025

in Cros. Obj(MD)SR.No.46352 of 2025

Suresh ...Respondent/

Respondent

Prayer in C.M.P.(MD)No.10457 of 2025 : The Civil Miscellaneous

Petition filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act, to condone the delay of

2231 days in filing the above Cross Objection in S.A.(MD)No.34 of 2019

on the file of this Court.

Prayer in Cros.Obj(MD)No.SR46352 of 2025 : The Cross Objection

filed under Order 41 Rule 22 C.P.C., against the judgment and decree

dated 27.04.2018 made in A.S.No.26 of 2013 on the file of Principal

District Judge, Pudukkottai, reversing the judgment and decree dated

25.06.2013 made in O.S.No.141 of 2008 with counter claim on the file of

Sub Court, Pudukkottai, in so far as they relate to the dismissal of the

appeal suit as to the counter claim that was rejected by the trial Court and

the first appellate Court is concerned.

Prayer in S.A.(MD)No.34 of 2019 : The Second Appeal filed under

Section 100 C.P.C., against the judgment and decree dated 27.04.2018

made in A.S.No.26 of 2013 on the file of Principal District Court,

Pudukkottai, reversing the judgment and decree dated 25.06.2013 made in

O.S.No.141 of 2008 on the file of Sub Court, Pudukkottai.

(in both cases)

For Petitioners : Mr.S.Srinivasa Raghavan

For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Ibram Saibu

for M/s.Ajmal Associates

2/12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/02/2026 03:11:30 pm )

C.M.P.(MD)No.10457 of 2025

in Cros. Obj(MD)SR.No.46352 of 2025

COMMON ORDER

The Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking Section 5

of Limitation Act seeking orders to condone the delay of 2231 days in

filing the cross objection in S.A.(MD)No.34 of 2019 on the file of this

Court.

2. The respondent as plaintiff filed a suit claiming the relief of

specific performance of the sale agreement dated 20.12.2006 alleged to

have been entered into between himself and the deceased Vasantha, owner

of the suit property. Since the said Vasantha died without Class-I legal

heirs, the respondent filed a suit against the petitioners / defendants, who

are the brothers and sisters of the deceased Vasantha. The petitioners have

filed a counter claim alleging that the said Vasantha executed a Will in

favour of the second petitioner and that the respondent is in possession of

the portion of the suit property as a lessee and claimed the relief of

eviction of the respondent from the portion of the property, arrears of rent

and for permanent injunction restraining the respondent from trespassing

into the remaining portion of the suit property. After full trial, the learned

3/12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/02/2026 03:11:30 pm )

C.M.P.(MD)No.10457 of 2025

in Cros. Obj(MD)SR.No.46352 of 2025

Subordinate Judge, Pudukkottai passed the judgment and decree dated

25.06.2013 granting the relief of specific performance and dismissing the

counter claim. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the petitioners

preferred an appeal in A.S.No.26 of 2013 and the learned Principal District

Judge, Pudukkottai passed the judgment and decree dated 27.04.2018

partly allowing the appeal and thereby setting aside the decree for specific

performance and confirming the dismissal of the counter claim.

Challenging the judgment and decree of the first appellate Court in setting

aside the decree for specific perfo