Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Rayappan vs Munusamy

Rayappan vs Munusamy

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided Jan 02, 2025
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1860503

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
CMP/20253/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rayappan

Respondent

Munusamy

Excerpt

in the high court of judicature at madrasdated: 02-01-2025coramthe honourable mrs justice t.v.thamilselvi cmp no. 20253 of 2021 and sa no. 1433 of 2005 rayappan and another appellant(s) vs munusamy rep.by power of attorney agent, pauline pavaraj and 2 others respondent(s) for appellant(s): mr.s. sethuramanorderthis civil miscellaneous petition has been filed seeking to condone the delay of 103 days in filing the petition to restore s.a.no.1433 of 2005, which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 19.11.2018.2. mr.s.sethuraman, learned counsel for petitioners/appellantsappeared and submitted that since the counsel on record went to madurai and his juniors were attending the lower court, they are not able to attend the hearing on that day. thereafter, they came to know that the above appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution on 19.11.2018, thereby he was hastening to file the present petition to restore the appeal. hence, the petition to restore was not filed in time. in view of the same, there is a delay of 103 days in filing the above petition. hence, he has filed the above petition to condone the delay and to restore the s.a.3. considering the fact that as the defendants, they are having validdefence to contest the suit, which was filed by the plaintiffs seeking for the relief of declaration and if the above second appeal is not restored, their right to defend the case would be defeated. therefore, this court is inclined to allow this petition and to restore the above second appeal.4. post the matter on 03.03.2025. rppt.v.thamilselvi, j.rpp c.m.p.no. 20253 of 2021 in s.a. no. 1433 of 2005 (1/2)

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02-01-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI CMP NO. 20253 of 2021 AND SA NO. 1433 OF 2005 RAYAPPAN and another Appellant(s) Vs MUNUSAMY Rep.By Power Of Attorney Agent, Pauline Pavaraj and 2 Others Respondent(s) For Appellant(s): Mr.S. Sethuraman

ORDER

This Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed seeking to condone the delay of 103 days in filing the petition to restore S.A.No.1433 of 2005, which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 19.11.2018.

2. Mr.S.Sethuraman, learned counsel for petitioners/appellants

appeared and submitted that since the counsel on record went to Madurai and his juniors were attending the lower court, they are not able to attend the hearing on that day. Thereafter, they came to know that the above appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution on 19.11.2018, thereby he was hastening to file the present petition to restore the appeal. Hence, the petition to restore was not filed in time. In view of the same, there is a delay of 103 days in filing the above petition. Hence, he has filed the above petition to condone the delay and to restore the S.A.

3. Considering the fact that as the defendants, they are having valid

defence to contest the suit, which was filed by the plaintiffs seeking for the relief of declaration and if the above second appeal is not restored, their right to defend the case would be defeated. Therefore, this Court is inclined to allow this petition and to restore the above second appeal.

4. Post the matter on 03.03.2025. rpp

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

rpp C.M.P.No. 20253 of 2021 in S.A. No. 1433 of 2005 (1/2)

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial