Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

M.Kamalakannan vs K.Govindarajan on 29 August, 2025

Author: P.Velmurugan

Bench: P.Velmurugan

                                                                                            C.R.P.No.2957 of 2025

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF MADRAS

                                                     DATED : 29.08.2025

                                                              CORAM:

                                   THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

                                                   C.R.P. No. 2957 of 2025

                     M.Kamalakannan                                                          ... Petitioner
                                                                   Vs
                     1. K.Govindarajan
                     2. M.Bhuvaneswaran
                     Shanmuganathan (Deceased)                                               ... Respondents


                     PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 C.P.C., to set
                     aside the fair and decretal order dated 22.04.2025 made in I.A.No.1 of
                     2022 in O.S.No.7178 of 2010 on the file of the III Additional City Civil
                     Court, Chennai.


                                             For Petitioner             : Mr.K.Arunprasad
                                             For Respondents : No appearance

                                                             ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition has been preferred challenging the fair and decretal order dated 22.04.2025 made in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in Page Nos.1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 05:52:56 pm ) C.R.P.No.2957 of 2025 O.S.No.7178 of 2010 on the file of the III Additional City Civil Court, Chennai.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.

3. Despite service of notice on the respondents and their names have also been printed in the cause list, none appeared on the side of the respondents, either in person or through a counsel.

4. It is seen from the records that the petitioner herein has filed the suit in O.S.No.7178 of 2010 for declaration and for consequential reliefs. The said suit was dismissed for default on 20.09.2017. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application in I.A.No.1 of 2022 invoking Section 5 of Limitation Act to condone the delay of 1795 days in filing the petition under Order IX Rule 9 C.P.C seeking to restore the said suit and the same was dismissed on 22.04.2025. Challenging the same, the present revision petition is filed by the petitioner. Page Nos.2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 05:52:56 pm ) C.R.P.No.2957 of 2025

5. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that originally the suit was filed before the Original Side of this Court in C.S.No.57 of 2001 against the respondents herein/defendants, subsequently, the said suit was transferred to City Civil Court on pecuniary jurisdiction and renumbered as O.S.No.7178 of 2010 and the said suit was dismissed for default on 20.09.2017 by the III Additional City Civil Court, Chennai. It is further stated that the petitioner is a senior citizen and is suffering from various ailments and due to his age factor and his ailments and also Covid-19 pandemic situation, he could not contact his counsel and give instructions to file the restoration petition in time and hence, there was a delay in filing the restoration petition. The delay is neither wilful nor wanton.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances and also considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the reasons assigned by the petitioner for condoning the delay of 1795 days in filing restoration application, are not satisfactory, however, in order to give one more opportunity to the Page Nos.3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 05:52:56 pm ) C.R.P.No.2957 of 2025 petitioner/plaintiff to prosecute the suit and the respondents/defendants are also not before this Court to oppose the restoration prayer, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed, setting aside the order dated 22.04.2025 made in I.A.No.1 of 202 in O.S.No.7178 of 2010 subject to the petitioner paying a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) to the Chief Justice Relief Fund, on or before 30.09.2025, failing which, this revision petition shall stand dismissed automatically without further reference to this Court. On payment of such costs, the trial Court is directed to take the application to restore the suit on file, if it is otherwise in order and dispose the same in accordance with law, after giving opportunity to the parties. There shall be no order as to costs.

List the matter under the caption ''For Reporting Compliance'' on 06.10.2025.

29.08.2025 Note : Issue Order Copy today Index: Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No ms Page Nos.4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 05:52:56 pm ) C.R.P.No.2957 of 2025 To

1. The III Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.

2. The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Madras.

Page Nos.5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 05:52:56 pm ) C.R.P.No.2957 of 2025 P.VELMURUGAN, J ms C.R.P. No. 2957 of 2025 29.08.2025 Page Nos.6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/08/2025 05:52:56 pm )