Madras High Court
Niraiyudaiyan vs Panneerselvam on 20 March, 2025
Author: R.Vijayakumar
Bench: R.Vijayakumar
C.R.P.(NPD)(MD)Nos.872 & 873 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 20.03.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
C.R.P.(NPD)(MD)Nos.872 & 873 of 2025
and
C.M.P(MD)Nos.4661 & 4662 of 2025
C.R.P.(NPD)(MD)No.872 of 2025
1.Niraiyudaiyan
2.Boothurai
3.Narayanan
4.Kannammal
5.Ananthammal
6.Sornalakshmi
7.Arumugasamy
8.Muppliammal ... Petitioners/Petitioners/Appellants/
Defendants Nos.2 to 9
Vs.
Panneerselvam ... Respondent/Respondent/Respondent/
Plaintiff
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of
India, to set aside the order I.A.No.2 of 2023 in Unreg.A.S.No. of 2023 dated
09.01.2025 on the file of the learned Subordinate Court, Ambasamudram.
For Petitioners : Mr.H.Mahamed Hussain
*****
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:43:17 am )
1/6
C.R.P.(NPD)(MD)Nos.872 & 873 of 2025
C.R.P.(NPD)(MD)No.873 of 2025
Ananthammal ...Petitioner/5th Petitioner/
5th Appellant/6th Defendant
1.Arikrishnan
2.Niraiyudaiyan
3.Boothurai
4.Narayanan
5.Kannammal
6.Sornalakshmi
7.Arumugasamy
8.Muppliammal
... Respondents Nos.2 to 8/Petitioner Nos.1 to 4 and 6 to 8/
Appellants Nos.1 to 4 and 6 to 8/Defendants Nos.2 to 5 and 7 to 9
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of
India, to set aside the order I.A.No.2 of 2023 in Unreg. A.S.No. of 2023 dated
09.01.2025 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Ambasamudram.
For Petitioner : Mr.H.Mahamed Hussain
COMMON ORDER
The appellants in unnumbered First Appeal, on the file of the Sub Court,
Ambasamudram, have filed the present revision petition, challenging the
dismissal of their application to condone the delay of 1251 days in filing the
First Appeal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:43:17 am )
C.R.P.(NPD)(MD)Nos.872 & 873 of 2025
2.A perusal of the records reveal that the sole respondent in
C.R.P(NPD)(MD)No.872 of 2025 and the first respondent in C.R.P.(NPD)
(MD)No.873 of 2025, have filed O.S.Nos.87 and 88 of 2008, respectively, as
against the two different defendants for the relief of declaration of title and
recovery of possession. Those two suits were decreed as prayed for by way of
common judgment, dated 02.01.2019. The first appeal has been preferred by the
defendants in the respective suits only on 08.08.2022 with a delay of 1251 days.
This condone delay application has been dismissed by the first appellate Court.
Challenging the same, the present revision petitions have been filed.
3.A perusal of the records reveal that common judgment in both the suits
has been delivered on 02.01.2019 and a copy application has been filed only on
07.01.2021. The copy applications were made ready on 20.12.2021. Thereafter,
the present first appeals have been filed in July 2022.
4.A perusal of the condone delay affidavit reveals that since one of the
petitioners was suffering from Diabetes and hypertension, he was not in a
position to take care of the suit. Further, it is contended that the first defendant
who was taking care of the suit had passed away on 16.01.2017 and other
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:43:17 am )
C.R.P.(NPD)(MD)Nos.872 & 873 of 2025
defendants are residing away from the Town and therefore, they were not able
to follow the case with their Counsel. This reason assigned by the revision
petitioner has not been accepted by the appellate Court and the condone delay
application has been dismissed.
5.The learned Counsel appearing for the revision petitioners had
submitted that the first defendant who was taking care of the suit had passed
away and a chance may be granted to prosecute the appeal.
6.I have considered the submissions made on either side and perused the
materials available on record.
7.The first appellate Court has narrated the dates and events and has
ultimately arrived at a finding that only one of appellants has been affected with
Diabetes and Hypertension and it cannot be the reason for condoning the huge
delay of 1251 days in filing the first appeal. It could be further seen that copy
application itself was filed after a period of two years. The Covid-19 started
only after one year from the date of judgment passed by the trial Court. That
apart, even though the copy was made ready in December 2021, the first appeal
has been filed only in July 2022. This delay has also not been explained. In such
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:43:17 am )
C.R.P.(NPD)(MD)Nos.872 & 873 of 2025
circumstances, this Court does not find any reasons to interfere in the order of
dismissing the condone the delay application.
8.Accordingly, both the Civil Revision Petitions stand dismissed.
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.
20.03.2025
Internet:Yes/No
Index:Yes/No
RJR
To
The learned Subordinate Judge, Ambasamudram.
Copy to:-
The Section Officer,
VR Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:43:17 am )
C.R.P.(NPD)(MD)Nos.872 & 873 of 2025
R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.
RJR
C.R.P.(NPD)(MD)Nos.872 & 873 of 2025
20.03.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:43:17 am )
