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

2026 Supreme(Mad) 525

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
K.MURALI SHANKAR
S. Sellam – Appellant
Versus
K. Chockaiah – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : R. Suriya Narayanan
For the Respondent: P. Rajagopalan

Table of Content
1. factual background of appeals and prior judgments. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments for and against condoning delay. (Para 5 , 6)
3. discussion on judicial discretion and sufficiency of cause. (Para 7 , 10 , 11)
4. principles governing condonation of delay and related precedents. (Para 8 , 9)
5. conclusion on the dismissal of petitions. (Para 12 , 13 , 14)

ORDER :

2. The petitioners herein filed a suit in O.S.No.157 of 2006 (O.S.No.501 of 2000) on the file of the District Munsif Court, Dindigul, claiming the reliefs of declaration and consequential permanent injunction and the first respondent herein filed a suit in O.S.No.158 of 2006 (O.S.No.432 of 2000), on the file of the District Munsif Court, Dindigul claiming the reliefs of declaration and permanent injunction and after joint trial in both the suits, the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Natham passed a common judgment dated 30.09.2009, decreeing the suit in O.S.No.158 of 2006 as prayed for and dismissing the sui in O.S.No.157 of 2006. Challenging the above said common judgment and decrees, the petitioners preferred two appeals in A.S.Nos.103 of 2009 and 105 of 2009 and the learned Principal Subordina

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