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

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice S. SOUNTHAR
E.V.NAGARATHINAM (DIED) – Appellant
Versus
P.INDURANI – Respondent
CMP(MD)/2504/2020



C.M.P(MD) Nos.2504, 2505 and 2507 of 2020

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction )

Monday, the Twenty Third day of January Two Thousand and

Twenty Three

PRESENT

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice S.SOUNTHAR

C.M.P(MD) Nos.2504, 2505 and 2507 of 2020

in

S.A.No.827 of 2002

1 E.V.NAGANATHAN (DIED)

... DECEASED SOLE APPELLANT

IN ALL THE PETITIONS

2 LOKAMATHA

3 JOTHI MUTHU RAMALINGAM

4 KRISHNAMOORTHY

... PETITIONERS 2 TO 4/

PROPOSED APPELLANTS 2 TO 4

(LRs OF THE SOLE APPELLANT)

IN ALL THE PETITIONS

Vs

1 P.INDURANI

2 UKKIRA PANDIYAN

3 N.MUTHURATHINAM

4 NAGAJOTHI

5 DEIVARANI

6 MANIKANDAN

7 VASUKI

8 N.INDURANI

9 GANDHI MEENAL

10 P.PONUCHAMY THEVAR(DIED)

11 A.SIVAGNANAM

12 MURUGESAN

1/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.P(MD) Nos.2504, 2505 and 2507 of 2020

13 NATARAJA THEVAR

14 MAYILVASAGAM

15 T.PANDI

16 PONNUSAMY @ UKKIRAPANDI THEVAR

17 R.KASINATHADURAI

18 DHANALAKSHMI

19 POOMALAI

S/O.PERIYANATHA THEVAR

20 SATHYA MURTHY

21 SANKARA IYER

... RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

IN ALL THE PETITIONS

22 UTHAMARAMAN

23 POOMALAI

D/O.LATE.PONNUSAMY THEVAR

24 NAGU

25 VELLAIMMAL

... RESPONDENTS 22 TO 25/

PROPOSED RESPONDENTS 22 TO 25

(LRs OF 10th RESPONDENT)

IN ALL THE PETITIONS

(RESPONDENTS 12,16,17 AND 19 WERE

DELETED AND ITSELF 21st RESPONDENT

STOOD EX-PARTE BEFORE THE APPELLATE

COURT, HENCE NOTICE MAY BE GIVEN UP)

PRAYER IN CMP(MD).2504/2020:

Petition filed praying that in the circumstances stated therein

and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court may be pleased

to condone the delay of 5928 days in filing the petition for set

aside the abatement caused due to the death of the sole appellate in

the above Second Appeal No.827/2002.

Prayer in CMP(MD). 2505/ 2020 :

To set aside the abatment caused due to the death of the sole

appellate in the above second appeal No.827/2002 in so far as the

sole appellate in concerned.

Prayer in CMP(MD). 2507/ 2020 :

To bring on record the petitioners 2 to 4 as legal

representative of the deceased E.V.Naganathan the sole appellate and

rank them as Appellants 2 to 4 in the above second appeal

2/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.P(MD) Nos.2504, 2505 and 2507 of 2020

No.827/2002.

PRAYER IN SA.No.827/2002:

Pleased to set aside the judgement and decree made in

A.S.No.154/97 on the file of Additional District Judge cum Chief

Judicial Magistrate Court, Ramanathapuram dated 22.06.2000 which

confirms the judgment and decree made in O.S.No.82/93 on the file of

Sub-Court, Ramanathapuram dated 25.03.1996.

ORDER : This petition coming up for orders on this day, upon

perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and

upon hearing the arguments of M/S.S.NATARAJAN, Advocate for the

petitioners in all the Petitions, the court made the following

order:-

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that

the second appeal filed by the deceased sole appellant was dismissed

earlier and a review application was filed by him in Review

Application (MD) No.113 of 2011. It is further submitted that the

sole appellant died pending review application leaving behind the

petitioners 2 to 4 as his legal representatives. The petitioner

filed CMP(MD) No.580 of 2005 to accept the cause title in the review

application and the same was allowed on 07.09.2011. Thereafter, the

review application was allowed and the second appeal is restored to

file. Therefore, there is a delay of 5928 days in filing the

petition to set aside the abatement caused to the second appeal by

the death of the sole appellant.

2. As far as the petition to bring on record the legal

representatives of the deceased parties are concerned, the Court

has to take liberal view while considering the petition to condone

the delay in seeking to set aside the abatement, especially when

legal representatives were allowed

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top