S.Sushanth Vs M.Vijayakumar

S.Sushanth vs M.Vijayakumar

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided Jun 19, 2026

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1422045

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1422045
Court: Chennai Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr Justice a.D.Jagadish Chandira
Decided On: Jun 19, 2026
Case Number: CMP/4472/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

S.Sushanth

Respondent

M.Vijayakumar

Excerpt

c.m.p.no.4472 of 2026 in c.m.a.sr.no.19750 of 2026a.d.jagadish chandira, j.this petition has been filed seeking to condone the delay of 258 days in filing the civil miscellaneous appeal.2. learned counsel appearing for thepetitioner/appellant submitted that the notice issued to r1, the driver of the insured vehicle, was returned with the endorsement ‘no such person’. he further submitted that r1 remained ex parte before the tribunal and no pay and recover was passed. therefore, he prayed that notice to r1 may be dispensed with.3. ms.i.malar, learned counsel, whotakes notice for r2, submitted that no order of pay and recover was passed by the tribunal, therefore, she has no objection to dispensing with service of notice on r1.4. the reasons adduced in the affidavitfiled in support of this petition being satisfactory, this civil miscellaneous petition is ordered and consequently, the delay of 258 days in filing the appeal is condoned, subject to the condition that the claimants/petitioners will not be entitled to any interest for the delay period i.e., for 258 days, in the appeal. 19.06.2026 ham note: registry is directed to number the civilmiscellaneous appeal, if it is, otherwise, in orderand list the same for admission in due course. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Full Judgment

C.M.P.No.4472 of 2026 in C.M.A.SR.No.19750 of 2026
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
This petition has been filed seeking to condone the delay of 258 days in filing the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner/appellant submitted that the notice issued to R1, the driver of the insured vehicle, was returned with the endorsement ‘no such person’. He further submitted that R1 remained ex parte before the Tribunal and no pay and recover was passed. Therefore, he prayed that notice to R1 may be dispensed with.
3. Ms.I.Malar, learned counsel, who
takes notice for R2, submitted that no order of pay and recover was passed by the Tribunal, therefore, she has no objection to dispensing with service of notice on R1.
4. The reasons adduced in the affidavit
filed in support of this petition being satisfactory, this Civil Miscellaneous Petition is ordered and consequently, the delay of 258 days in filing the appeal is condoned, subject to the condition that the claimants/petitioners will not be entitled to any interest for the delay period i.e., for 258 days, in the appeal. 19.06.2026 ham Note: Registry is directed to number the Civil

Miscellaneous Appeal, if it is, otherwise, in order

and list the same for admission in due course. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Same Court & Year Chennai Orders · 2026 Same Parties S.Sushanth vs M.Vijayakumar Same Judge Honourable Mr Justice a.D.Jagadish Chandira