Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
K.Murali Shankar, J
Hemathkumar – Appellant
Versus
A.Padmini – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeals against dismissal of delay condonation in restoration petitions. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. conversion from revisions based on prior ruling. (Para 3) |
| 3. supreme court clarifies no merger of delay order with merits. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. delay dismissal revisable, not appealable. (Para 6) |
| 5. direct conversion to civil revision petitions. (Para 7 , 8) |
COMMON ORDER
These Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are directed against the orders passed by the Courts below dismissing (i) the petitions filed under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay in filing applications for setting aside the exparte decree under Order IX Rule 13 C.P.C. for restoring the suit which was dismissed for default under Order IX Rule 9 C.P.C., and (ii) the petitions filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay in preferring the appeals.
2. Except the appellants in C.M.A.(MD)Nos.332 of 2026 and 361 of 2026, the appellants in other appeals originally filed the Civil Revision Petitions challenging the dismissal of the petitions filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
3. The learned Counsel for the appellants would submit that this Court, relying upon the decision
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
