Madras High Court
Premavathi vs Raja @ Rajendran on 4 November, 2024
Author: S.S. Sundar
Bench: S.S. Sundar
C.M.P.No.22540 of 2024
in O.S.A.SR.No.28923 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.11.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SUNDAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL
C.M.P.No.22540 of 2024
in
O.S.A.SR.No.28923 of 2024
Dilli Bai (since deceased)
1.Premavathi
2.Jamuna Ravi
3.Chitra
4.Maheswari
5.K.Balachander ... Petitioners
Vs.
Raja @ Rajendran ... Respondent
[Cause title accepted vide order of Court dated
05.08.2024 made in C.M.P.No.15766 of 2024
in O.S.A.SR.No.28923 of 2024]
Prayer in C.M.P.No.22540 of 2024 : Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed
Page 1
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.P.No.22540 of 2024
in O.S.A.SR.No.28923 of 2024
under Order XIV Rule 8 of the Original Side Rules of Madras High Court
read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay of 5144 days
in filing the Original Side Appeal in O.S.A.SR.No.28923 of 2024.
Prayer in O.S.A.SR.No.28923 of 2024 : Original Side Appeal filed under
Order XXXVI Rule 1 of Original Side Rules r/w. Clause 15 of Letters Patent
against the judgment and decree dated 08.09.2009 in T.O.S.No.26 of 2004
on the file of this Court.
For Petitioners : Mr.M.Velmurugan
for M/s.J.Eva Rosalin Santhakumari
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.S. SUNDAR, J.)
This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed to condone the delay of 5144
days in filing the above Original Side Appeal as against the judgment and
decree made by the learned Single Judge in T.O.S.No.26 of 2004 dated
08.09.2009.
2.The parties are relatives. The respondent is the son of one
Kathirvelu Achari and the petitioners 1 to 4 are daughters and 5th petitioner
Page 2
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
is the son of Kathirvelu Achari. After the death of Kathirvelu Achari in
2002, the Will alleged to have been executed by the deceased Kathirvelu
Achari became the subject matter of T.O.S.No.26 of 2004. The respondent
filed the Original Petition as an Executor of the Will. The petitioners herein
are the respondents in the proceedings. The 1st petitioner was examined as
D.W.1 in the said proceedings.
3.Now, the present appeal is filed nearly 14 years after the judgment
in the testamentary proceedings. In the affidavit filed in support of this
petition, the petitioners have not given valid reasons for the inordinate delay
of 14 years. In the affidavit filed by one of the petitioners namely Chitra, it
is stated that her counsel had not intimated regarding filing of a regular
appeal against the judgment in T.O.S.No.26 of 2004. It is further stated that
the respondent had approached her and forced her to put her signature in the
release deed. It is further stated that, after getting the release deed, she came
to know that an order had been passed against the petitioners and that by
virtue of the order passed by this Court which is impugned in the above
Appeal, the respondent had made an attempt to get her signature for
Page 3
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
registering the release deed.
4.The petitioners have come with a story which cannot be accepted by
anyone. Despite the fact that the delay is more than 14 years, a casual
explanation has been offered by the petitioners, ignoring the serious legal
implications of entertaining this application. The delay of 5144 days, which
is beyond 14 years, cannot be condoned unless there are very strong reasons
and explanation for such a long delay. The only reason given is that the
petitioners came to know about the adverse order in T.O.S.No.26 of 2004
only when the respondent tried to get a document registered, which is
nothing but false which can never be an explanation for such a long delay.
The petitioners have not even disclosed the date on which they came to
know about the judgment in T.O.S.No.26 of 2004. Therefore, the bona
fides of the petitioners is doubtful and this Court is not inclined to exercise
its discretion in favour of the petitioners for condoning such a long delay.
Page 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5.Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed.
Consequently, O.S.A.SR.No.28923 of 2024 is rejected.
(S.S.S.R., J.) (P.D.B., J.)
04.11.2024
mkn
Internet : Yes
Page 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.S. SUNDAR, J.
and
P. DHANABAL, J.
mkn
04.11.2024
Page 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
