M.Velusamy vs Mylathal
2022 Latest Caselaw 16976 Mad

                                                                        Rev.Application No.225 of 2022

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                               DATED : 28.10.2022

                                                      CORAM

                              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
                                           Rev.Application No.225 of 2022
                                             & CMP No.17771 of 2022


                   M.Velusamy                                                         ...Petitioner
                                                       Vs.

                   1.Mylathal

                   2.A.Maragathamani @ Bagyamman

                   3.Aruchamy

                   4.Jothimani

                   5.Rathamani

                   6.Velumani

                   7.Bhuvaneswari

                   8.K.M.Natarajan

                   9.M.Subramaniam

                   10.N.Selvaraj


                                                        1/4



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                   Rev.Application No.225 of 2022

                   11.Lakshmi

                   12.S.Kavitha

                   13.Rukmani                                                                 ..Respondents

                   PRAYER : Petition filed under Order 1 CPC read with Section 114 of CPC,
                   against        the     Judgment       dated   06.01.2021   passed   by    His     Lordship
                   S.M.Subramaniam in C.M.A.No.2 of 2014 on the file of the High Court.


                                        For Petitioner             : Mr.Pothiraj



                                                                 ORDER

The review petition is filed to review the order dated 06.01.2021 passed

in CMA.No.2 of 2015.

2.The petitioner states that the learned counsel could not be able to

appear, since the service provider had not properly communicated the listing of

the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal before the High Court on 06.01.2021 to the

counsel on record. Thus, non-appearance of the learned counsel was neither

wilful nor wanton. The petitioner further states in the event of non-appearance,

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Rev.Application No.225 of 2022

the case ought to have been dismissed for default. However, the fact remains

that the pleadings were taken into consideration and the case was decided on

merits. The petitioner could not be able to establish any error apparent on

record for the purpose of reviewing its order. The grounds raised on merits

cannot be considered in a review application and therefore, the petitioner has to

workout his remedy, if at all he is aggrieved from and out of the order passed

by this Court. The power of review cannot be extended to readjudicate the

issues already considered by this Court. Only in the event of an error apparent,

Court would exercise the power of judicial review and not otherwise. Since, the

petitioner could not be able to establish any error apparent, this Court is not

inclined to entertain the review petition and consequently, the same stands

dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

28.10.2022

Internet : Yes Index : Yes Speaking order/Non-Speaking Order ssr

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Rev.Application No.225 of 2022

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

ssr

Rev.Application No.225 of 2022 & CMP No.17771 of 2022

28.10.2022

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