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

V.Sukumar vs Ramanikanth

Madras High Court|21 March, 2017

JUDGMENT / ORDER

The 2nd defendant has preferred the above appeal, challenging the order passed in I.A.No.12 of 2009 in O.S.No.8 of 2005 dated 01.07.2015 which was filed for restoration of O.S.No.8 of 2005 and dismissed for default.
2. Heard both sides.
3. The plaintiff had filed O.S.No.8 of 2005 on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Puducherry. The suit was dismissed for default on 16.12.2008. Therefore, the plaintiff had filed I.A.No.12/2009 to restore the suit. However, the plaintiff allowed the said application also to be dismissed for default on 20.04.2009. In order to restore the I.A.No.12/2009, which was dismissed for default, the plaintiff filed another I.A.No.236/2009 for restoration of I.A.No.12/2009. On 12.04.2012, the I.A.No.236/2009 was allowed as the defendants/respondents were called absent. After restoration of I.A.No.12/2009, the same was taken up for hearing and after giving sufficient opportunity to both the parties in order to give a quietus to the litigation of the year 2005, the Principal District Judge, Puducherry, had allowed the said application, thus restoring the suit in O.S.No.8/2005.
4. This Court sees no error of jurisdiction or infirmity in the above said order.
5. While trying the I.A.No.236/2009, the present petitioner remained absent. While allowing I.A.No.12/2009, it was agreed by the parties that they will go for the trial. However, the revision has been preferred by the revision petitioner and unnecessarily, the suit has been stayed for more than a year now.
6. Therefore, this Court is inclined to direct the Principal District Judge, Puducherry, to dispose of the O.S.No.8/2005 on or before 30.09.2017 and the parties are directed to appear before the trial Court on 10.04.2017, from which date, the suit has to be taken on day-to-day basis and disposed of.
7. With the above direction, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. .03.2017 tsi Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes To The Principal District Judge, Puducherry.
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J.
tsi CMA No.2611 of 2015 .03.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in
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

V.Sukumar vs Ramanikanth

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
21 March, 2017