Madras High Court
Karthesan Palavesam ... Revision vs S.M.S.Mohamed Noohu (Died) on 2 April, 2025
Author: R.Vijayakumar
Bench: R.Vijayakumar
C.R..P.(MD)SR.No.12556 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 02.04.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
C.R.P(MD)SR.No.12556 of 2025
Karthesan Palavesam ... Revision Petitioner/
Respondent/Respondent
Vs.
S.M.S.Mohamed Noohu (Died)
1. Sithi Beevi Fathima
2. Fathima Beevi
3. Sahul Hameed
4. Hameed Ashima Masootha ... Respondents/
Appellants/
Petitioners
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 25 of Tamil Nadu
Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, to set aside the order and
decreetal order dated 17.06.2022 passed in R.C.A.No.39 of 2017 on the file
of the Rent Control Appellate Authority/Subordinate Judge, Tiruchendur by
reversing the order dated 23.10.2017 passed in R.C.O.P.No.3 of 2015 on the
file of the Rent Controller/District Munsif Court, Srivaikundam.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Sankararamasubramanian
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/04/2025 05:56:34 pm )
C.R..P.(MD)SR.No.12556 of 2025
ORDER
The present Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Section 25 of
the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, challenging
the order passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority/Subordinate Judge,
Tiruchendur, in R.C.A.No.39 of 2017 on the file of the Sub Court,
Tiruchendur, on 17.06.2022. The revision petition has been presented before
this Court on 12.02.2025. The Registry has raised an objection with regard to
the maintainability of the revision and it is listed today.
2. As per Section 25 (2) of the above said Act, the revision should be
preferred within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of the
order passed by the appellate authority. High Court has got powers to
entertain a revision petition beyond 30 days but upto another 30 days
provided it is satisfied that there is sufficient cause for not preferring the
application within a period of 30 days. Therefore, it is clear that the Act has
fixed an outer time limit for entertaining the revision petition. In such
circumstances, Section 5 of the Limitation Act is not applicable.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/04/2025 05:56:34 pm )
C.R..P.(MD)SR.No.12556 of 2025
3. The present Civil Revision Petition having been filed after a period
of two years, is not maintainable. The learned counsel appearing for the
revision petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court reported in 1995 Supp (4) Supreme Court Cases 578 (Shantilal
M.Bhayani Vs.Shanti Bai) wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court was pleased
to hold that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, is applicable for an appeal filed
under Section 23 of the above said Act. However, the said judgment is not
applicable to the facts of the present case, in view of the fact that no outer
time limit is fixed for the appellate authority under Section 23 (1) (b) of the
Act. However, an outer time limit has been fixed under Section 25 (2) of the
said Act.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner has also
relied upon the Division Bench judgment of our High Court in CDJ 1990
MHC 629 (Arya Vysia Samajam, Rep by President S.K.Dhandapani
Chettiar Vs.Murugesa Mudaliar and others), wherein the Hon'ble Division
Bench of our High Court has held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, is
applicable for legal heir application filed in revision petition filed under
Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act. In the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/04/2025 05:56:34 pm )
C.R..P.(MD)SR.No.12556 of 2025
present case, that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, would not be applicable to
the very filing of revision under Section 25 of the Act. Only in pending
Revision Petition, if there is a delay in impleading the legal heirs of the
deceased party, Section 5 of the Limitation Act, can be revoked.
5. In such circumstances, this Court is sustaining the orders passed by
the Registry and therefore, this Civil Revision Petition is rejected at the SR
stage itself. There shall be no order as to costs.
02.04.2025
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
ebsi
Note: The Registry is directed to return
the original records after getting necessary
acknowledgment from the learned counsel
appearing for the revision petitioner.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/04/2025 05:56:34 pm )
C.R..P.(MD)SR.No.12556 of 2025
To
1. The Subordinate Judge,
Rent Control Appellate Authority,
Tiruchendur.
2. The Rent Controller/District Munsif Court,
Srivaikundam.
3. The Section Officer,
Vernacular Records,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/04/2025 05:56:34 pm )
C.R..P.(MD)SR.No.12556 of 2025
R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.
ebsi
C.R.P(MD)SR.No.12556 of 2025
02.04.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/04/2025 05:56:34 pm )
