Madras High Court
CRP/6405/2025 of Mumtaz A. Karim Lal Vs Syed Mohammed Irshad on 3 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 03-09-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI
CRP No. 6405 & 6406 of 2025
and
CMP Nos.31684 & 31695 of 2025
CRP No. 6405 of 2025
Mumtaz A. Karim Lal
..Petitioner
Vs
1. Syed Mohammed Irshad,
2. Mohamed Irfan
..Respondents
CRP No. 6406 of 2025
Mumtaz A.Karim Lal
..Petitioner
Vs
1. Mohamed Irfan
2. Syed Mohammed Irshad
..Respondents
Prayer in C.R.P.No.6405 of 2025: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure,1908, to allow the Civil Revision Petition and set aside the impugned order dated 19.08.2025 passed in I.A. No.5 of 2024 in O.S No.2246 of 2023 on the file of the XV Additional City Civil Court, Chennai.
Prayer in C.R.P.No.6406 of 2025: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure,1908, to allow the Civil Revision Petition and set aside the impugned order dated 19.08.2025 passed in I.A.No.4 of 2024 in O.S.No.2246 of 2023 on the file of the XV Additional City Civil Court, Chennai.
For Petitioner:
Mr.Najeeb Usman Khan
For Respondent:
Mr.S.S.Rajesh
for R1 in Crl.O.P.No.6405 of 2025
for R2 in Crl.O.P.No.6406 of 2025
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
COMMON ORDER
These Civil Revision Petitions have been filed to set aside the impugned order dated 19.08.2025 passed in I.A. No.4 & 5 of 2024 in O.S No.2246 of 2023 on the file of the XV Additional City Civil Court, Chennai.
2. Heard Mr.Mr.Najeeb Usman Khan, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.S.Rajesh, the learned counsel for the Syed Mohammed Irshad.
3. The present revision petitioner is the plaintiff in a suit for permanent injunction. Pending suit, interim relief was not granted to the petitioner and hence, he moved this Court in CRP No.1026 of 2023 and this Court granted an interim injunction restraining interference with the possession of the petitioner. Subsequently, the defendants were called and set ex parte in the suit, which resulted in an ex parte decree being passed on 24.01.2023 in O.S.No.2246 of 2023. As a result of the suit itself being decreed, the revision petitioner withdrew the Civil Revision Petition, as nothing survived for consideration, on 26.07.2024.
4. According to Mr.Najeeb Usman Khan, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, the respondent/defendants were waiting all along and immediately after the petitioner withdrew the Civil Revision Petition, they have filed an application for condonation of delay and to set aside the ex parte decree passed on 24.01.2024. On these grounds, the application for condonation of delay was opposed by the petitioner. However, the trial Court exercised discretion in favour of the respondents and condoned the delay by imposing a cost of Rs.5,000/- on the respondents. The said cost was not received by the petitioner since the petitioner was aggrieved by the order and were proposing to challenge the same by way of revision, which is the present revision petition.
5. On going through the impugned order, I find that the trial Court has found sufficient cause being shown by the respondents while allowing the condone delay application and has also given valid reasons for the same. The costs were also tendered in compliance with the order passed by the trial Court. However, since the revision petitioner intended to challenge the said order, he returned the cost which was paid by the respondents. Considering the fact that the suit is one for declaration and permanent injunction, the trial Court has thought it fit to afford an opportunity to the respondents to contest the suit on merits. I do not see any perversity or illegality in the discretion exercised by the trial Court. However, at the same time, there is considerable force in the submission of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, that the timing of the condone delay application seems to be a little inappropriate. Having withdrawn the Civil Revision Petiton in which the petitioners had the benefit of interim injunction in their favour, thereafter alone the application for condonation of delay has been filed. However, this issue can be adequately addressed while disposing of the revision.
6. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of subject to the following directions:
(i) A total cost of Rs.10,000/-, that is, Rs.5,000/- for each I.A., shall be paid within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order to the counsel for the petitioner, by the respondent. On compliance with the said condition, the condonation application as well as the application to set aside the ex-parte decree shall stand allowed.
(ii) In view of the interim protection granted by this Court in C.R.P No.1026 of 2023, the petitioner shall have the benefit of an interim injunction till the disposal of the suit.
(iii) The trial Court shall ensure that the pleadings are completed within a period of four weeks from the date of compliance being reported regarding payment of costs. Thereafter, the trial Court shall frame issues within a period of two weeks and shall expedite the trial and dispose of the suit on or before 30.04.2027.
(iv) No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 03-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No NSL To The XV Additional City Civil Court, Chennai.
P.B.BALAJI J. NSL CRP No. 6405 & 6406 of 2025 and CMP Nos.31684 & 31695 of 2025 03-09-2026