Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 1476 (MAD)

Kunchithapatham v. Palaninathan

2010-04-01

M.JAICHANDREN

body2010
Judgment :- 1. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the fair and decretal order, dated 10.08.2009, made in I.A.No.263 of 2009, in O.S.No.152 of 2004, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Jayangondam. 2. The petitioner herein is one of the plaintiffs in the suit, in O.S.No.152 of 2004. The said suit had been filed, praying for a decree to declare the suit properties, as private trust properties of Vedanthika Pravarthica Mutt and for settling a scheme for the private trust, to have the effective management over the trust properties and for a direction to the defendants to handover the possession of the suit properties to the plaintiffs. The suit, in O.S.No.152 of 2004, had been presented before the appropriate Court, which is the Subordinate Court, Ariyalur and it had been numbered as O.S.No.8 of 2001. Thereafter, the suit had been transferred to the District Munsif Court, Jayangondam and renumbered as O.S.No.152 of 2004. The petitioner had filed, I.A.No.263 of 2009, praying that the District Munsif, Jayangondam, may be pleased to return the plaint, to be presented before the proper Court. By an order, dated 10.08.2009, the learned District Munsif, Jayangondam, allowed the interlocutory application, with costs of Rs.500/-, to be paid by each one of the plaintiffs, to the defendants 1 to 4, 6, 7, and 12. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that the suit had been presented, by the plaintiffs, originally, before the appropriate Court, which is the Subordinate Court, Ariyalur. After the suit had been numbered, as O.S.No. 8 of 2001, it had been transferred, due to administrative reasons, to the District Munsif Court, Jayangondam and renumbered as O.S.No.152 of 2004. There is no fault on the part of the plaintiffs. Even though there is no fault on the part of the plaintiffs, the learned District Munsif, Jayangondam, had imposed the cost on the plaintiffs. In such circumstances, the petitioner had preferred the present Civil Revision Petition before this Court, under Article 227 of the constitution of India. 4. There is no appearance on behalf of the respondents. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. In such circumstances, the petitioner had preferred the present Civil Revision Petition before this Court, under Article 227 of the constitution of India. 4. There is no appearance on behalf of the respondents. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. In view of the avernments made on behalf of the petitioner and in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the records available, this Court finds it appropriate to set aside the order, dated 10.08.2009, made in I.A.No.263 of 2009, in so far as it relates to the payment of costs by the plaintiffs in the suit, in O.S.No.152 of 2004. This Civil Revision Petition is ordered accordingly. No costs.