Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 22076 Mad
Judgement Date : 9 November, 2021
Review Application No.63 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 09.11.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
Review Application No.63 of 2021
1. T. Murugaiyan
2. T. Ravi
3. D.Loganayaki
4. A. Anusuya
5. K. Santhakumari
6. S. Jamuna
7. S. Saranya
8. S. Vidya .... Applicant
Vs
1. Shanmugha Mudaliyar
2. Suryamurthi Mudaliyar
3. Maheswari
4. Gopalakrishnan
5. M. Dhandapani .... Respondents
Prayer :- Review Application filed under Order XLVII Rule 1 r/w. 114 of
Civil Procedure Code to review the Judgment and Decree dated 27.02.2020
made in S.A.No.1539 of 2002 on the file of this Court.
For Petitioners : Mrs.AL.Gandhimathi
for Mr.E.Kotteeswaran
For R2 : Mr.B.Kumar
Senior Counsel for Mr.Usharaman
1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Review Application No.63 of 2021
ORDER
This Review Application has been filed to review the Judgment
and Decree passed by this Court dated 27.02.2020 in S.A.No.1539 of 2002.
2. Mrs.AL.Gandhimathi, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner submitted that though the appellants raised specific ground for
adverse possession in respect of the suit property, this Court, while admitting
the Second Appeal, failed to frame the substantial question of law. The
appellants raised specific ground that they are admittedly in possession of
the suit property for several decades. She further submitted that in fact the
Trial Court also framed issues in this regard. Therefore, this Court failed to
discuss about the grounds raised by the appellants, while dismissing the
Second Appeal.
3. Per contra, Mr.B.Kumar, learned Senior Counsel appearing
for the second respondent submitted that the Trial Court has framed issues
with regard to the adverse possession and the same was discussed in a
detailed manner by the Appellate Court which rejected the claim of the
appellants. He further submitted that the appellants and the respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Review Application No.63 of 2021
are close relatives and as such, they were permitted to reside in the suit
property. That apart, it is nothing but abuse of process of law. and it cannot
be considered in the Second Appeal. Therefore, there is no error apparent on
the face of the record to review the Judgment passed by this Court and as
such the Review Application is liable to be dismissed.
4. In view of the above, the Review Application is dismissed.
09.11.2021 Lpp Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking Order: Yes/No
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN,J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Review Application No.63 of 2021
Lpp
Review Application No.63 of 2021
09.11.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!