Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 8256 Mad
Judgement Date : 13 July, 2023
C.R.P.(NPD) No.705 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 13.07.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN
C.R.P.(NPD)No.705 of 2018
and C.M.P.No.3682 of 2018
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Pondicherry. ... Petitioner
vs.
1.Anthonydoss
2.Sagayanathan
3.Rojalee
4.Ramejoo
5.Savarimuthu
6.Arokiyadoss
7.Mardhandan ... Respondents
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India
against the fair and decretal order dated 25.08.2015 made in I.A.No.913
of 2015 in M.C.O.P.No.17 of 2008, on the file of Principal District
Court, Villupuram.
For Petitioner: Mrs.Elveera Ravindran
For Respondents: Ms.Dhanalakshmi (for R1)
for Mr.E.C.Ramesh
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/4
C.R.P.(NPD) No.705 of 2018
ORDER
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that
the policy itself that have been produced before the Court was a forged
document and the Oriental Insurance Company is not responsible at all.
2.According to him, on the date of the accident, the vehicle did not
have an insurance and the one produced before the Court is a rank
forgery. The award was passed on the basis of Ex.P5 which is the copy of
insurance. As per Ex.P5, the seventh respondent vehicle was having
valid insurance. The petitioner did not file an application immediately,
but filed an application after two years.
3.They have not filed an application to condone the delay in filing
a review petition. The period of limitation to file a review is 30 days.
Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure is meant to correct clerical
errors in the judgment or decree. Knowing that the limitation has went
against them, they have deliberately not filed the application under Order
47, but had invoked Sections 151 and 152 of the Code of Civil
Procedure.
4.The learned trial Judge has dismissed the application holding
that such a belated application cannot be entertained. The only solution
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(NPD) No.705 of 2018
for the respondent is to file an appeal as against the judgment and decree
in MCOP.No.17 of 2008 dated 24.02.2010. The period from 21.03.2012
till date can be considered for exclusion, as the petitioner has been
bonafidely pursuing the remedy under Section 151 read with Section 152
of Code of Civil Procedure.
5.There is no apparently clerical error between the judgment and
decree. It does not require interference. The order of the learned Principal
District Judge, Villupuram in I.A.No.913 of 2015 in MCOP.No.17 of
2008 is confirmed. The petitioner may file an appeal against the decree,
if so advised and as stated above, can get the exclusion for having
bonafidely pursued this litigation.
6.With the above observations, this Civil Revision Petition is
dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
13.07.2023 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation:Yes/No vs
To
The Principal District Court, Villupuram.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(NPD) No.705 of 2018
V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN,J.
vs
C.R.P.(NPD)No.705 of 2018 and C.M.P.No.3682 of 2018
13.07.2023
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!