Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
Accordingly, this petition is allowed
Provisions considered
- Limitation Act, 1963 s. 5
Key paragraphs
- Para 77. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. No costs.17.03.2026MSM3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis R.SAKTHIVEL, JMSMCMP.No.20864 of 2024inS.A.No. 1398 of 200217.03.20264/4
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17.03.2026CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. SAKTHIVELCMP.No. 20864 of 2024inS.A.No. 1398 of 2002----C.Cenrayan (Died)
A. ChellammalW/o.Late. Arumugham2.C.RajaS/o.Late. Cenrayan3.A.IndiraniW/o.P.Annamalai4.C.SubramanianS/o.Late. Cenrayan5.C.DurairajS/o.Late. Cenrayan(The petitioners 1 to 5 are the LRs of the deceased C.Cenrayan) ....Petitioners/AppellantsVersusKuppusamy (Died) 1.P.Suresh @ ManikandanS/o. Perumal2.P.Vijayarani H.D/o.Perumal1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
P.MageshwaranS/o. Perumal4.P.VennilaD/o.Perumal5.P.RamadossS/o.Perumal6.P.PrabhuS/o. Perumal7.ThavamaniW/o.Perumal8.TamaraiS/o.late. Kuppusamy9.KanthamaniD/o.Late. Kuppusamy10.SrinivasanS/o.Late. Kuppusamy..Respondents/RespondentsPrayer: Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1908, praying to condone the delay of 319 days in filing the petition to set aside the order of dismissal dated 11.04.2023 for non-prosecution passed in S.A.No. 1398 of 2002.For Petitioners: Mr.K.RamkumarFor R1:Mr.SairamFor M/s.P.Jagadeesan---2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ORDERMr.K.Ramkumar, Counsel on record for the Petitioners/Appellants and Mr.J.Sairam, representing Mr.P.Jagadeesan, Counsel on record for the Respondent No.1 are before this Court. 2. Service is sufficient for the Respondent No.2, 5, 6 and 8 to 10.3.It is reported that the Respondent Nos.4, 7 and 9 passed away.
Notice sent to the Respondent No.3 was returned with an endorsement “Left”.
This Court has perused the case file.
Considering the facts and circumstances, and with a view to decide the matter on merits and in the interest of justice, this Court is inclined to allow this petition.
Operative part
Accordingly, this petition is allowed. No costs.17.03.2026MSM3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis R.SAKTHIVEL, JMSMCMP.No.20864 of 2024inS.A.No. 1398 of 200217.03.20264/4
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this petition is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Limitation Act, 1963 — s. 5.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.