Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 9776 Mad
Judgement Date : 7 August, 2023
C.R.P(PD)(MD).No. 165 of 2019
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 07.08.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
C.R.P(PD)(MD).No. 165 of 2019
and CMP(MD)No.749 of 2019
1. Arumugam
2. Baskar
... Petitioners
Vs
1. Rajambal
2. Senthilkumar
3. Vijayakumar
4. Shobana
... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution
of India to set aside the Fair and Decreetal order, dated 03.07.2018 in I.A.
No. 133 of 2018 in O.S. No. 190 of 2018 on the file of the learned District
Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Alangudi by allowing this Civil
Revision Petition.
For Petitioners : Mr.G.Sridharan
For Respondents : No Appearance (R1 to R4)
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(PD)(MD).No. 165 of 2019
ORDER
To set aside the fair and decreetal order, dated 03.07.2018 in
I.A. No. 133 of 2018 in O.S. No. 190 of 2018 passed by the learned
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Alangudi, the revision petitioners
have filed this Civil Revision Petition.
2.The petitioners are the respondents/defendants and the
respondents are the petitioners/plaintiffs before the Court below. For the
sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per the litigative status
before Court below. Despite the name of respondents printed in the cause
list, neither the respondents nor their counsel appeared before this Court.
3.The brief facts, which give rise for filing the instant civil
revision petition are as follows:
(i)It appears that the petitioners have filed a suit for the relief
of declaration and injunction. They had filed an application to reopen the
plaintiff’s side evidence on the ground to let in further evidence in respect
of four boundaries and to prove their possession.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P(PD)(MD).No. 165 of 2019
(ii)The said application was resisted by the
respondents/defendants on the ground that the instant application is the
fourth petition for seeking re-open of the case. The present application has
been filed, after the matter was posted for Judgment in February, 2012. It
is further stated in their counter statement that the petitioners have
unnecessarily filed CMA(SR) and Tr.O.P petitions before the District
Court and in the way, they dragged the matter for a period of five years.
When they lost in all these battles, they came up with the application to
reopen their side evidence. Therefore, it was contended in the counter
statement that the instant application is hit by resjudicata. Though the
Court below, has mentioned the conduct of the petitioners is not bonafide,
allowed the application.
4.Aggrieved with the order, the petitioners/plaintiffs have filed
the present revision petition before this Court.
5.I have given my anxious consideration to either side
submission.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P(PD)(MD).No. 165 of 2019
6.The learned Judge has recorded all the misdeeds committed
by the petitioners. However, by simply referring as if to give an
opportunity, he has allowed the application. It is pertinent to mention here
that as rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the
Court below could not find any reason to allow the application. It is
curious to note that the learned trial Judge has believed the case of the
petitioners.
7.As rightly contended by the respondents/defendants that the
very attempt of the petitioners/plaintiffs in dragging the matter could be
seen from the counter statement in paragraph No.6, wherein, it has been
stated that the instant application is filed after a period of five years, that
too, after the matter was posted for Judgment. It is pertinent to mention
that suit is of the year 2008. Therefore, such a conduct of the petitioners
could not be encouraged. Hence, this Court is inclined to allow this
revision.
8.Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed by
setting aside the order dated 03.07.2018 in I.A. No. 133 of 2018 in O.S.
No. 190 of 2018, passed by the learned District Munsif cum Judicial
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P(PD)(MD).No. 165 of 2019
Magistrate Court, Alangudi. Considering the long pendency of the suit, the
trial Court is directed to dispose the suit within a period of three months,
since the matter is already in the stage of argument.
9.There is no order as to costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petition is closed.
07.08.2023
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
PNM
To
1.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Alangudi
2.The Section Officer Vernacular Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P(PD)(MD).No. 165 of 2019
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.,
PNM
ORDER IN C.R.P(PD)(MD).No. 165 of 2019 and CMP(MD)No.749 of 2019
07.08.2023
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!