Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

J Pushparani vs Lilly And Others

Madras High Court|03 August, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:03.08.2017 CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ CRP (PD) NO.2643 of 2017 J.Pushparani ... Petitioner
versus
1. Lilly
2. Gloria Hariet
3. Wilfred Joseph
4. Edward Joseph Manuel
5. Jasmine
6. A.Kennet Thomas
7. A.Pretricia
8. Premila Kumar
9. Josephine Vasantha
10. Philomen C.J.Harry
11. Mary Benigna
12. Irudyaraj
13. Mary Margaret Suganthi
14. Miss Mary Nirmala
15. Pauline Manuel
16. Malathi
17. V.M.Natarajan
18. Tamil Nadu Government Servants Co-operative Building Society Ltd., Rep by its Special Officer, XNC 747, rep by its Special Officer, having his office at Office of Commissioner of Fisheries, II Floor, Chennai-600 006.
http://www.judis.nic.i1n 9. K.Chokkalinga Pillai
20. T.Muthukumar
21. G.Kalamalini
22. Nandakumar
23. S.Arumugham
24. M.S.Kalaimani
25. M.Vivekanandan
26. T.Nagakumar
27. N.Krishnan
28. S.Jeyanthi
29. T.Shanthi
30. T.Umadevi
31. Saravanakumar Rajaram ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition has filed under Section 227 of the Constitution of India, to direct and to expedite the proceedings in I.A.No. 87 of 2015 in O.S.No. 498 of 2004 pending on the file of the Additional District Judge, Chengalpattu.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Louthu Paul Belson For Respondents : No appearance
O R D E R
Aggrieved over the long pendency of the case, the second defendant has filed the above petition. In the suit for partition a preliminary decree was passed on 14.08.2014. Thereafter, the parties have taken steps for appointment of Advocate Commissioner to divide the suit properties by metes and bounds. The respondents in I.A No. 87 of 2015 have made an endorsement "no objection". Inspite of the same, http://www.judis.nic.itnhe Advocate Commissioner was not appointed. In the mean while it appears that one of the parties died and I.A No. 87 of 2015 for impleading of legal heirs was filed on 21.05.2015 and it continues in the same stage till date. The parties have no objection for dividing the properties amicably to get their shares.
2. The petitioner is 82 years old, therefore, they seek for earlier disposal of the case pending before the Trial Court.
3. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, we consider it is as fit case for issuance of a direction to dispose of the suit proceedings at the earliest. Accordingly, the direction is issued to the Additional District Judge, Chengalpattu to dispose of I.A No. 87 of 2015 in O.S.No. 498 of 2004 within the period of three months, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
4. With above direction, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of.
03.08.2017 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No bsm/raja To The Additional District Judge, Chengalpattu
M.GOVINDARAJ, J.
bsm/raja
CRP (PD) NO.2643 of 2017
03.08.2017
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

J Pushparani vs Lilly And Others

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
03 August, 2017
Judges
  • M Govindaraj