Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B. Balaji, J
Selvaraj S/o. Athimoolam, Sangeetha D/o. Selvaraj – Appellant
Versus
Prem Anand S/o. Selvaraj, Dhandapani, N.R.Venkatesan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. hearing of counsel for both sides. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court's observation on the delay and costs. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. final order regarding the appeal decision. (Para 5) |
For Petitioner(s): T.Sezhian For Respondent(s): M/s.S.P.Harikrishnan for R.3 R.1 – No appearance R2- Died ORDER Heard Mr.T.Sezhian, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.P.Harikrishnan, learned counsel for the third respondent.
2. The revision petition has been filed on account of dismissal of an application for default in not paying the costs.
3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, it is not a case where the costs was not paid, but it was wrongly paid and not in line with the directions issued by the trial Court.
4. In the light of the above, considering that the delay was only 3 days, I am inclined to allow the revision. However, the delay and prejudice caused to the respondents have to be suitably compensated. The petitioner is directed to pay total cost of Rs.3,000/-(Rupees Three Thousand Only) which , in fact, has been handed over to the learned counsel for the respondents in open court.
5. The revision petition is allowed and the order passed in I.A.No.9 of 2025 is set aside. The
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
