Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 837 (MAD)

P. D. Muthusamy v. Ramalingam

2017-04-03

M.SUNDAR

body2017
ORDER : There are the two Civil Revision Petitions before this Court. Both have been filed by invoking Article 227 of the Constitution of India (COI). 2. Therefore, considering the nature of the matter and the nature of the prayer made before this court coupled with the fact that this is the revision under Article 227 of the COI, this Court is of the view that the civil revision petitions can be disposed of without notice to the respondents, as I propose to give directions to the trial court. 3. In both the civil revision petitions, one P.D. Muthusamy is the revision petitioner. 4. There are two suits. One suit is O.S.No.63 of 2004, which has been filed, assailing an order of the Revenue Divisional Officer (RD), dated 4.7.2003. This is referred to as the first suit. 5. The second suit is O.S.No.139 of 2009. This suit has been filed assailing an order of the District Revenue Officer (DRO), dated 20.3.2009, confirming the above said order of the RDO. This suit is, hereinafter, referred to as the second suit. 6. The revision petitioner before me, i.e., P.D. Muthusamy, is the 5th defendant in the first suit and 4th defendant in the second suit. 7. It is also brought to my notice that on 7.11.2016, the trial court in the proceedings in the first suit, has passed an order to the effect that the evidence recorded in that suit (first suit) shall be used for the second suit also. In other words, the trial court, vide order dated 7.11.2016 in the first suit, has ordered that the evidence recorded in the first suit shall be treated as evidence in the second suit. This order, the court is told, is final and the parties are to proceed with the suits on the basis of this order. 8. Be that as it may, it is seen that the issues were framed in the first suit on 4.11.2006. In the second suit, the issues were framed on 20.11.2013. 9. This order, the court is told, is final and the parties are to proceed with the suits on the basis of this order. 8. Be that as it may, it is seen that the issues were framed in the first suit on 4.11.2006. In the second suit, the issues were framed on 20.11.2013. 9. Considering the nature of the suits, the above said order dated 7.11.2016 and also taking into account the fact that the first suit is one of the year 2004 and is nearly 1-1/2 decades old now, I am inclined to pass the following order : (i) The trial court, namely, the District Munsif court at Perambalur is directed to take up both the suits, namely, O.S.Nos.63 of 2004 and 139 of 2009 together (in the light of the order dated 7.11.2016 in O.S.No.63 of 2004). (ii) Both the suits shall be posted on the same date, on all hearing dates for the sake of convenience of all concerned, including the trial court. (iii) Both the suits shall be tried as expeditiously as possible and disposed of within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 10. Both the civil revision petitions are disposed of with the above directions.