Mohanambal Vs Chellammal

Mohanambal vs Chellammal

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided Apr 29, 2026

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1437595

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/1437595
Court: Chennai Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice R.Sakthivel
Decided On: Apr 29, 2026
Case Number: CMP/9154/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mohanambal

Respondent

Chellammal

Excerpt

in the high court of judicature at madrasdated : 29.04.2026coram:the hon'ble mr.justice r.sakthivel mohanambal w/o. govindasamy permabalur, ...petitionerversus1.chellammal (died) w/o. natesan pillai 2.muthiah pillai (died) 3.dhanabal (died) 4.ponmalar 5.umesh (died) 6.kannagambujam all are residing at stamp vendor street, ...respondents prayer: this civil miscellaneous petition has been filed under section 5 of limitation act praying to condone the delay of 718 days in filing the restoration petition in s.a.no.562 of 2004 with respect of respondents 1, 2, 3 and 5 which was dismissal on 12.01.2024. for petitioner : mr.r.sathish kumar for m/s.sarvabhauman associates for respondents - 4 & 6 : ms.a.nilaphar for ms.r.meenalorderthis civil miscellaneous petition has been filed under section 5 of limitation act, praying to condone the delay of 718 days in filing the restoration petition seeking to restore s.a.no.562 of 2004 which was dismissed as against the respondents 1, 2, 3 & 5 on 12.01.2024.2. heard mr.r.sathish kumar, counsel representingm/s.sarvabhauman associates, counsel on record for the petitioner/appellant and ms.a.nilaphar, counsel representing ms.r.meenal, counsel on record for the respondents 4 & 6.3. representing counsel for the respondents 4 & 6 submitted that the counsel on record has no objection for this petition being allowed.4. this court has perused the case files.5. having satisfied with the reasons stated in the affidavit filed insupport of this petition and with a view to decide the matter on merits, this court is inclined to allow this petition. hence, this civil miscellaneous petition is ordered accordingly.6. registry is directed to number the petition filed by the appellant for restoration of s.a.no.562 of 2004, if it is otherwise in order and list the same for hearing on 01.06.2026. mrr index: yes/nor.sakthivel, j.mrr

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 29.04.2026
Coram:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL Mohanambal W/o. Govindasamy Permabalur, ...Petitioner
Versus
1.Chellammal (Died) W/o. Natesan Pillai 2.Muthiah Pillai (Died) 3.Dhanabal (Died) 4.Ponmalar 5.Umesh (Died) 6.Kannagambujam All are residing at Stamp Vendor Street, ...Respondents Prayer: This Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act praying to condone the delay of 718 days in filing the restoration petition in S.A.No.562 of 2004 with respect of Respondents 1, 2, 3 and 5 which was dismissal on 12.01.2024. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sathish Kumar for M/s.Sarvabhauman Associates For Respondents - 4 & 6 : Ms.A.Nilaphar for Ms.R.Meenal

ORDER

This Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act, praying to condone the delay of 718 days in filing the restoration petition seeking to restore S.A.No.562 of 2004 which was dismissed as against the Respondents 1, 2, 3 & 5 on 12.01.2024.

2. Heard Mr.R.Sathish Kumar, Counsel representing

M/s.Sarvabhauman Associates, Counsel on record for the Petitioner/Appellant and Ms.A.Nilaphar, Counsel representing Ms.R.Meenal, Counsel on record for the Respondents 4 & 6.

3. Representing Counsel for the Respondents 4 & 6 submitted that the Counsel on record has no objection for this petition being allowed.

4. This Court has perused the case files.

5. Having satisfied with the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in

support of this petition and with a view to decide the matter on merits, this Court is inclined to allow this petition. Hence, this Civil Miscellaneous Petition is ordered accordingly.

6. Registry is directed to number the petition filed by the Appellant for restoration of S.A.No.562 of 2004, if it is otherwise in order and list the same for hearing on 01.06.2026. mrr Index: Yes/No

R.SAKTHIVEL, J.

mrr

Same Court & Year Chennai Orders · 2026 Same Parties Mohanambal vs Chellammal Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice R.Sakthivel