Madras High Court
S.Subramanian vs Selvi on 29 November, 2023
Author: T.V.Thamilselvi
Bench: T.V.Thamilselvi
CRP(PD).No.4272 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 29.11.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
CRP(PD).No.4272 of 2023
and CMP.No.25983 of 2023
S.Subramanian ... Petitioner
Vs.
Selvi ...Respondent
PRAYER: This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India, praying to set aside the order dated 11.08.2023 passed
in I.A.No.5 of 2023 in O.S.No.374 of 2015 on the file of the Additional
Subordinate Judge, Namakkal by allowing this Civil Revision Petition.
For Petitioner : M/s.Elizabeth Ravi
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the order dated
11.08.2023 passed by the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Namakkal
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
in I.A.No.05 of 2023 in O.S.No.374 of 2015.
2. Before the trial Court, the revision petitioner/plaintiff has filed a
suit for recovery of money against the respondent/1 st defendant in the year
2015 and she also contested the suit. The said suit was heard and reserved fr
Judgement. After closure of the evidence and reserved the Judgement, at
that time, the 1st defendant filed an application before the trial Court to
reopen the defendant's side evidence. The said application was strongly
objected by the plaintiff staing that after closure of evidence more than 6
months, the 1st defendant filed an application as such is not maintainable.
On hearing both sides, the trial Judge had allowed the said application,
holding that the respondent/1st defendant to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- to the
revision petitioner/plaintiff on or before 13.09.2022. Challening the same,
the revision petitioner/plaintiff has filed this Civil Revision Petition.
3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner/plaintiff submitted
that after closure of evidence more than 6 months, the defendant filed an
application to reopen the defendant's side evidence as such is not
maintainable. He further submitted that the case was heard and reserved for
Judgment, at this stage, the defendant filed an application is erroneous one .
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Hence, he prayed to allow this Civil Revision Petition.
4. On a perusal of the records, it reveals that after closure of the
evidence and reserved for Judgement, at that stage, the defendant has filed
an application to reopen the defendant's side evidence and written statement
also filed long back and evidence was not adduced. Therefore, the trial
Court had given one more more opportunity to the defendants to adduce the
evidence. However, the trial Court is directed to complete the trial
proceedings within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy
of this order.
5. In view of the above, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.
29.11.2023
Speaking / Non Speaking order
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
Index :Yes/No
msrm
To
1. The Additional Subordinate Judge, Namakkal
2. The Section Officer,
VR Section,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
High Court of Madras.
T.V.THAMILSELVI.J,
msrm
29.11.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
