Vinay Kumar Mittal vs Kanchana
2021 Latest Caselaw 9428 Mad

                                                                               C.R.P.(N.P.D).No. 2393 of 2018

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                    DATED : 09.04.2021

                                                           CORAM

                                   THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

                                               C.R.P.(NPD) No.2393 of 2018

                     Vinay Kumar Mittal                                    ... Petitioner
                                                             Vs.
                     1.Kanchana
                     2.Sundarraj
                     3.Soundarrajan
                     4.Ashok Kumar Mittal                                  ... Respondents

                     Prayer :- Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of Civil
                     Procedure Code, to set aside the order and decreetal order dated 09.03.2018
                     made in I.A.No.77 of 2017 in A.S.No. Nil of 2017 on the file of
                     the Sub Judge, Arakkonam.
                                   For Petitioner      :   Mr.R.Rajesh Vivekananthan
                                   For R1 to R3        :   Mr.J.Shanmuga Sundarababy

                                                           ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the fair and decreetal

order dated 09.03.2018 made in I.A.No.77 of 2017 in A.S.No. Nil of 2017

on the file of the Sub Judge, Arakkonam., thereby dismissing the petition

to condone the delay in filing the appeal suit.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.R.P.(N.P.D).No. 2393 of 2018

2. The petitioner is the third plaintiff and the respondent is the

defendant. The petitioner along with two others filed a suit for permanent

injunction in respect of the suit property and the same was dismissed by a

judgement and decree dated 20.09.2015. Thereafter, the petitioner alone

filed an appeal suit with a delay of 586 days.

3. A perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the condone delay

petition reveals that the petitioner was affected for Tumor Induced

Osteomalacia disease for the past four years and as such, he was not able to

stand and admitted in the All India Institute of Medical Sciences

(A.I.I.M.S.) New Delhi. Thereafter, he was advised to take rest. Therefore,

he was not able to contact the counsel. After he recovered fully, he

collected the judgment and decree and preferred an appeal suit with a delay

of 586 days. In support of his contention, the petitioner did not file any

evidence to prove the same and also not examined any witnesses.

Admittedly, there are three plaintiffs. Though, the petitioner was affected

from disease and admitted in the hospital, the other plaintiffs are very much

available in the station and also they are none other than the own brother

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.R.P.(N.P.D).No. 2393 of 2018

and father of the third plaintiff. Therefore, they could have very well

contacted their counsel and could have taken steps to file the appeal suit.

Therefore, the Court below rightly dismissed the petition to condone the

delay in filing the appeal suit. Accordingly, this Court finds no illegality

or infirmity in the order passed by the Court below. Hence, the Civil

Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs.

09.04.2021 lpp

Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking Order: Yes/No

To

The Additional Sub Court, Vaniyambadi.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ C.R.P.(N.P.D).No. 2393 of 2018

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN.J,

lpp

C.R.P.(NPD) No. 2393 of 2018

09.04.2021

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