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 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

N.Ponraj vs Vendam Amirthammal on 22 August, 2022

Author: R.N.Manjula

Bench: R.N.Manjula

                                                                         C.R.P(PD).Nos.492 & 493 of 2022

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                    DATED : 22.08.2022

                                                         CORAM :

                                   THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA

                                           C.R.P.(PD).Nos.492 and 493 of 2022
                                              and C.M.P.No.2574 of 2022

                     N.Ponraj                                           ...Petitioner in both Revision
                                                                                              Petitions
                                                                ..Vs.
                     1.Vendam Amirthammal
                     2.P.Gowri
                     3.N.Gunasekaran
                     4.P.Gopal
                     5.A.Saravana Pandian
                     6.G.karthika                                      ..Respondents in both
                                                                           Revision Petitions
                     Common Prayer:- Civil Revision Petitions are filed under Article 227 of

                     the Constitution of India, for direction to complete the enquiry in

                     I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2020 in O.S.Nos.4714 of 2017 on the file of the VII

                     Additional City Civil Court, Chennai.



                                      For Petitioners in both    : Mr.K.Sankaran for
                                                                   Mr.R.Natarajan


                     1/6


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                          C.R.P(PD).Nos.492 & 493 of 2022

                                               COMMON ORDER

These Civil Revision Petitions have been preferred seeking direction to complete the enquiry in I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2020 in O.S.No.4714 of 2017 on the file of the VII Additional City Civil Court, Chennai and dispose of the same as early as possible.

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

3.The revision petitioner is the plaintiff who has filed the suit in O.S.No.4714 of 2017 seeking for the relief of partition and permanent injunction. During the pendency of the said suit, the petitioner filed two interlocutory applications in I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2020. I.A.No.3 of 2020 has been filed for granting an order of mandatory injunction directing the respondents 5 and 6 to remove the gate put in the common area in the ground floor and I.A.No.4 of 2020 has been filed for contempt of the Court for violating the order dated 08.04.2019 passed in I.A.No.2 of 2019. 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P(PD).Nos.492 & 493 of 2022

4.The records would show that on 08.04.2019, the Court has passed an order in I.A.No.2 of 2019 on the undertaking given by the defendants 5 and 6 that they will not disturb the plaintiff's residential portion of the ground floor measuring about 250 sq. ft. until the disposal of the suit. The learned trial Judge has specifically directed that the temporary injunction is granted not to disturb the plaintiff's possession and enjoyment in the ground floor residential portion measuring about 250 sq.ft. Despite the plaintiff claimed the prayer of temporary injunction for his entire 1/3rd share over the plaint schedule property, the learned trial Judge has observed that the entire claim for the plaintiff in the suit property of 1/3rd share is a matter to be dealt during the time of trial and hence, the relief of temporary injunction was granted, by limiting to his residential portion of 250 sq.ft. Since the plaintiff has filed interlocutory applications in I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2020 by alleging that the respondents have not abided the order of the Court and had obstructed the enjoyment of the plaintiff in the residential portion also, the learned trial Judge ought to have taken the matter seriously and dealt with it. Since the suit itself is of the year 2017 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P(PD).Nos.492 & 493 of 2022 and there is an urgency to dispose the suit, in view of the subsequent development now alleged by the plaintiff/revision petitioner, it is appropriate to impress the learned trial Judge to dispose both the Interlocutory Applications in I.A.Nos. 3 and 4 of 2020 and the Suit in O.S.No.4714 of 2017 as expeditiously as possible.

5.In view of the above, these Civil Revision Petitions are disposed of. The learned VII Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai is directed to dispose of the suit in O.S.No.4714 of 2017 and Interlocutory Applications in I.A.Nos. 3 and 4 of 2020 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

22.08.2022 vkr Index:Yes No Speaking Order:Yes/No To 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P(PD).Nos.492 & 493 of 2022

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

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

R.N.MANJULA,J.

5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P(PD).Nos.492 & 493 of 2022 Vkr C.R.P.(PD).Nos.492 and 493 of 2022 and C.M.P.No.2574 of 2022 22.08.2022 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis