THIRUNAGALINGAM versus LINGESWARAN & ANR.

THIRUNAGALINGAM versus LINGESWARAN & ANR.

The High Court order condoning the delay of 1116 days is set aside because the respondents relied on the same explanations that had earlier been considered and rejected by the courts including this Court in SLP (C) Nos.2054 & 2055 of 2022; repetition of previously adjudicated and dismissed grounds without new...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Thirunagalingam; Respondent: Lingeswaran & Anr.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
12 May 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court Against High Court Order Dated 25.04.2023
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order dated 25.04.2023 set aside
Legal Topics
Condonation of Delay, Order IX Rule 13 CPC, Order XLI Rule 3 a CPC, Ex‑parte Decree, Abuse of Process
Civil Procedure Limitation Act Property Law Condonation of Delay Order IX Rule 13 CPC Order XLI Rule 3 a CPC Ex‑parte Decree Abuse of Process

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thirunagalingam

Appellant

Lingeswaran & Anr.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court Against High Court Order Dated 25.04.2023

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether delay of 1116 days in filing the first appeal should be condoned
  2. 2 Whether appeal should be permitted to proceed on merits after condonation
  3. 3 Whether respondents can renew the same grounds previously rejected by courts and this Court

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court order condoning the delay of 1116 days is set aside because the respondents relied on the same explanations that had earlier been considered and rejected by the courts including this Court in SLP (C) Nos.2054 & 2055 of 2022; repetition of previously adjudicated and dismissed grounds without new material amounts to abuse of process; consequently the delay cannot be condoned and the High Court order is perverse.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order dated 25.04.2023 set aside

Orders

  • Impugned order dated 25.04.2023 of the Madras High Court set aside
  • Appeal allowed