Madras High Court
P.Gnanamurugan vs K.Vaiyapuri on 11 April, 2022
CMP.No.27840/2019 in SA.SR.No.135763/2019 & SA.SR.No.135763/2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 11.04.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR
CMP.No.27840/2019 in SA.SR.No.135763/2019 &
SA.SR.No.135763/2019
P.Gnanamurugan .. Petitioner /
Appellant
Vs.
1.K.Vaiyapuri
2.K.Thiyagaseelan
3.K.Raghunathan
4.K.Sankaran .. Respondents
Prayer in CMP.No.27840/2019:- Petition filed under Section 5 of the
Limitation Act, to condone the delay of 1555 days in filing appeal against
the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.39/2011 dated 29.04.2015 on
the file of the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Dharmapuri reversing
the well considered judgment and decree in O.S.No.124/2009 dated
10.03.2011 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Dharmapuri.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1 Page of 4
CMP.No.27840/2019 in SA.SR.No.135763/2019 & SA.SR.No.135763/2019
Prayer in SA.SR.No.135763/2019 :- Second Appeal filed under Section
100 of the Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and decree passed in
in A.S.No.39/2011 dated 29.04.2015 on the file of the learned Additional
Subordinate Judge, Dharmapuri in reversing the well considered judgment
and decree in O.S.No.124/2009 dated 10.03.2011 on the file of the District
Munsif Court, Dhamapuri.
For Petitioner /
Appellant : Mr.S.C.Vishwanth
For Respondents : Mr.Arun Anbumani
ORDER/JUDGMENT
(1) This petition is filed to condone the delay of 1555 days in filing the
Second Appeal.
(2) In the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the petitioner has
stated that after the judgment and decree of the Lower Appellate
Court, the defendants had not disturbed the peaceful possession and
enjoyment of the suit property which is a common lane and that there
was some understanding. It was further stated that after the
respondents who are the defendants in the suit started disturbing the
enjoyment of the suit property as a common lane, the petitioner has
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2 Page of 4
CMP.No.27840/2019 in SA.SR.No.135763/2019 & SA.SR.No.135763/2019
realised that there is a delay in filing the appeal. Even according to
the petitioner, the defendants started disturbing the enjoyment of the
petitioner one year after the suit. Even though it is accepted that there
is no explanation for the delay of nearly four years in filing the
appeal. The contention that there was some negotiation or oral
arrangement after the judgment and decree of the Lower Appellate
Court is denied in the counter affidavit of respondents.
(3) Since, this Court is unable to find any reason for the substantial
delay, this Court is of the view that this Court has no discretion to
condone the delay in matter like this.
(4) Therefore, this petition is dismissed for want of merits.
Consequently, the Second Appeal is rejected at the SR Stage.
11.04.2022
cda
Internet : Yes
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3 Page of 4
CMP.No.27840/2019 in SA.SR.No.135763/2019 & SA.SR.No.135763/2019
S.S.SUNDAR, J.,
cda
To
1.The Additional Subordinate Judge, Dharmapuri.
2.The District Munsif Court, Dhamapuri.
3.The SAR, Main AE Section
High Court, Madras.
4.The Section Officer
VR Section, High Court
Chennai.
CMP.No.27840/2019 in SA.SR.No.135763/2019
& SA.SR.No.135763/2019
11.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4 Page of 4
