Ranganayagi vs Mayilsamy
2021 Latest Caselaw 20511 Mad

                                                                               C.R.P.No.2322 of 2020

                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                               DATED : 06.10.2021

                                                    CORAM :

                              THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN

                                              C.R.P.No.2322 of 2020
                                                       and
                                             C.M.P.No.14609 of 2020

                     Ranganayagi                                                    ... Petitioner

                                                          Vs


                     Mayilsamy                                                    ... Respondent


                     PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the

                     Constitution of India praying to set aside the fair and decretal order dated

                     17.09.2020 against I.A.No.511 of 2019 in O.S.No.209 of 2013 on the file

                     of District Munsif Court at Dharapuram.



                                         For Petitioner    : Mr.R.Rajarajan.

                                         For Respondent : No appearance.




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                     1/6
                                                                                C.R.P.No.2322 of 2020

                                                         ORDER

This Petition is filed seeking to challenge the order passed in

I.A.No.511 of 2019 in O.S.No.209 of 2013 passed by the Learned

District Munsif, Dharapuram on 17.07.2020.

2.The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the

Petitioner filed Suit in O.S.No.209 of 2019 seeking the relief of

declaration of title in respect of the Suit property and for the

consequential relief of temporary injunction in respect of the Suit

property. The Petitioner filed I.A.No.511 of 2019 for amending the

plaint for the reason that the Survey number had been wrongly typed in

the plaint body and in the description of the property. This is only a

typing mistake and is due to oversight and inadvertence. However, this

Petition came to be dismissed by the Learned District Munsif,

Dharapuram for the reason that the Petitioner has already filed

amendment Petition and in that amendment Petition, this amendment was

not sought.

3.It is the further submission of the Learned Counsel for the

Petitioner that the failure to incorporate the amendments now sought, in

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

C.R.P.No.2322 of 2020

the earlier amendment petition is again a mistake committed by oversight

and because of the mistake committed by oversight, the rights of the

Petitioner cannot be depressed. If the proposed amendment is not

permitted, even if the Petitioner gets Judgment and decree in her favour,

that cannot be effectively implemented. Therefore, he prayed for setting

aside the order of the Learned District Munsif, Dharapuram and for

allowing the amendment Petition.

4.Considered the submissions of the Learned Counsel for the

Petitioner and perused the records.

5.It is seen from the details given in the amendment Petition

that survey number of the Suit property has been omitted and wrongly

given. Now these mistakes are sought to be rectified by the amendment.

This Petition was dismissed for the reason that in the earlier amendment

Petition filed in I.A.No.1127 of 2018, this amendment was not asked.

Following the principle that "the law will assist those who are vigilant

and not to those who sleep over their rights", the Learned District

Munsif, Dharapuram dismissed the Petition.

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

C.R.P.No.2322 of 2020

6.There is no quarrel over this legal maxim. However, we have

to consider the interest of the parties. The Petitioner should have sought

this amendment in the earlier amendment Petition itself. It was not done,

obviously, due to negligence and oversight. This Court agrees with the

submissions made by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that if the

proposed amendment is not allowed, even if she gets Judgment in her

favour, she will not be in a position to enjoy the fruits of decree. To

render substantial justice to the parties, this Court is of the considered

view that amendment Petition can be allowed subject to imposing certain

costs on the Petitioner.

7.In this view of the matter, the order passed in I.A.No.511 of

2019 in O.S.No.209 of 2013 by the Learned District Munsif, Dharapuram

is set aside and this Civil Revision Petition is allowed. Consequently,

connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

8.The Petitioner is directed to pay a costs of Rs.5,000/- to the

Respondent. Only on making such payment, the Learned District Munsif,

Dharapuram is directed to permit the Petitioner to make suitable

amendment as per the details given in the amendment Petition. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

C.R.P.No.2322 of 2020

9. The Learned District Munsif, Dharapuram is also directed to

give opportunity to the Respondent to file additional written statement, if

any, and proceed to dispose the matter on merits and in accordance with

law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three

months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

06.10.2021 ay

Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No

To

The District Munsif Court, Dharapuram.

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

C.R.P.No.2322 of 2020

G.CHANDRASEKHARAN, J.

ay

C.R.P.No.2322 of 2020 and C.M.P.No.14609 of 2020

Dated:06.10.2021

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