High CourtsSingle Bench(2002) 06 MAD CK 0228

C.A. Khabeer vs Abdul Nubeen, Abdul Nuyeen, Mrs. Afzalunnisa, Mrs. Fazlunnisa, Mrs. Zaitoon Bi, Mrs. Kareemunnisa, Mrs. Fathimunnisa, Muhammad Salahuddin, Mrs. Zahida Begum, Mrs. Azam Jan, Abdul Wadood, Abdul Muheet, Abdul Shukoor, Mrs. Izzathunnisa, Abdul Salam, Abdul Aleem, Abdul Akheel, Abdul Munnavar, Mrs. Tajunnisa, Abdul Aslam, Abdul Rafeeq, Abdul Shafee, Abdul Hanif, Abdul Javid, Mrs. Kathoon Bee, Mrs. Mumtaz Begum, Abdul Mujeeb, Abdul Hadi, Abdul Latheef, Mrs. Nazima, Mrs. Muneerrunnisa, Mrs. Fareeda Begum, Muhammad Nazuruddin, Muhammed Naseeruddin, Muhammed Turabhudeen, Mrs. Akhstarunnisa, Khaja Muyeenuddin, Mrs. Wazeerunnisa, Mrs. Astharunnisa, Hymayoon, R. Abdul Wahid, Mrs. Zaibunnisa, Basheerunnisa, Rahmathullah, Zaheerullah, Amanullah, Mrs. Riyazunnisa, Samiullah, Fathullah, Mrs. Shazahi Bee, Mrs. Humaria Begum, Mrs. Hafeeza Begum, Mrs. Shakira Begum, Mrs. Zubaida Bee, Abdul Hamid, Abdul Ghani, Mrs. Jameela, Abdul Satar, Abdul Ghaffar, Mrs. Sarunnisa, Abdul Subban, Mrs. Sajeeda Begum, Mrs. Waheeda Begum, Mrs. Mahooda Begum, Miss Zakira Begum, Miss Naveeda Begum, Kursheed Ahmed, Mrs. Vasheerunnisa, Abdul Irfan, Mustaz Ahamed, Nizaar Ahamed, Miss Zahirunnisa, Miss Hajeerunnisa, E. Abdul Gafoor, Shakeel Ahamed, Khaleel Ahamed, Habeeza Begum, Mrs. Saira Banu, Mrs. Amina Bee, Afsar, Mrs. Sadika Begum, Mrs. Mehrunnisa, Hassan Basha, Khader Basha, Chan Basha, Ismail Basha, Saleem Basha, Asmathunnisa, Ayisha Begum, Mrs. Fareeda Banu, Sheeran Banu, Assiff represented by their mother and guardian, Mrs. Fareeda Banu, Mohammed Kaleemullah, Mohammed Zafarullah, Muhammad Khaleelullah, Mrs. Kausar, Mrs. Muktarunnisa, Mohammad Bilak, Mohammad Jalal, Mrs. Banu, C.A. Saboor, C.A. Khallaq, Mrs. Shareefunnisa, C.J. Abdul Quaiyoom, Mrs. Razia Begum, C.A. Hakeem, Mrs. Zeenathunnisa, K. Md. Khalid, Mrs. Safia Begum, C.A. Nayeem, Akbar, Akhtar, Afsar, Ahmadi, Nazir, Azmath Basha, Farooq Basha, Siddiq Basha, Mrs. Tasleemunissa, Mrs. Nazeemunnisa, Mrs. Athila Begum, Mrs. Afsar Begum, Mrs. Hilal Begum, Mrs. Habeebunnisa, Miss Shahin Banu, Athiqullah, Liyakathullah, Hidayathullah, Sanas Banu represented by their Mother,, Mrs. Nazeerunnisa, Mohammed Innayathullah, Mrs. Mehrunnisa, Mrs. Sagheerunnisa, Sulaiman, Azeez Basha, Mrs. Afeefa, Mrs. Rafia Begum, Mrs. Badrunnisa, Mohammed Illiyas, Malika Begum, Miss Mehrunnisa, Muhammad Usman, Rahimunnisa, Mohammed Imran, Mohammed Irfan, Mohammed Ikram, Miss Fahima, Abdul Rasheed, Mrs. Bee Bee Jan, Subhan, Miss Rabiya Bee, Mr. Tahiruddin, Mrs. Jabeen, Miss Hasmin and Miss Ajimunnisa

Madras High Court · Decided on 13 June 2002 · Citation: (2002) 2 MLJ 678

HON’BLE JUDGES
A.S. Venkatachalamoorthy, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
C.R.P. No. 16 of 2002

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

33 paragraphs · 764 words

A.S. Venkatachalamoorthy, J.—Revision is filed against the order in I.A. No.17681/2001 in O.S. No.5115/2000 on the file of VII Additional Judge, City Civil Court. The respondents 1 to 7 as plaintiffs filed the suit against 145 defendants in O.S. No.5115/2001 for partition and other reliefs. Pending suit, on 28/3/2001 the 28th defendant died. The legal representatives of the said defendant were not brought on record within the time prescribed by law, and there was some delay. The plaintiffs filed three applications viz., (1) to condone the delay of 25 days in filing the application to set aside the abatement, (2) to set aside the abatement and 3) to bring one son and three daughters of the deceased 28th defendant as legal representatives. These three applications were contested only by the present petitioner,viz., the 94th defendant.

2.

The trial Court after considering the entire matter, by an order dated 6.12.2001 allowed all the three applications, however, on terms. That is to say, the plaintiffs were directed to pay a sum of Rs.500/- as costs to the 94th defendant, who only contested the applications.

3.

Present Revision has been filed against the order in I.A. No.17681/2001 as referred to supra. The contention of the petitioner herein appears to be that in the absence of any application with a prayer to condone the delay in bringing the legal representatives of the 28th defendant on record, the trial Court ought not to have straight away allowed the application viz., to bring the legal representatives of the 28th defendant on record.

4.

The 28th defendant in the suit died and the three applications referred supra in paragraph No.1 were filed on the 175th day. Under law, a period of 90 days is granted to bring on record the Legal Representatives. If that is not done, the suit abates.

5.

Let the Court proceed to understand the term ''abate'' in legal parlance and for which purpose the legal dictionaries and law lexicons can be looked into.

I. BLACK''s LAW DICTIONARY, Seventh Edition by Bryan A.Garner, explains the term "Abatement" as follows:-

" 1.The act of eliminating or nullifying abatement of a nuisance abatement of a writ.

2.

The suspension or defeat of a pending action for a reason unrelated to the merits of the claim the defendant sought abatement of the suit because of misnomer

.............

II. WHARTON''s Law Lexicon, Fourteenth Edition would give the meaning as:-

" To prostrate, break down, remove, or destroy; also to let down or cheapen the price in buying or selling."

............

III. In WORDS AND PHRASES, PERMANENT EDITION, Published by West Publishing Co, "Abatement" is defined as a suspension of proceedings in a suit from the want of proper parties capable of proceeding therein." [The Telegraph vs. Lee - 98 N.W. 364]

............

To abate a suit is to put a final end to its existence, the word "abate" having been defined as put an end to; to do away with. [Dodge vs. Superior Court in and for Los Angels Country - 33 p.2d. 695].

...........

IV. In CORPUS JURIS SECUNDUM, Complete Restatement of the entire American Law, the word "Abatement" is explained thus:-

" Abatement at law is the overthrow or a destruction of a pending action apart from cause of action; in equity the suspension of the proceedings."

.......................

V. In CYCLOPEDIA OF LAW AND PROCEDURE by William Mack and Howard P. Nash, the meaning of the word "Abate" is given as under:-

" A generic term, derived from the French word ''abattre'', and signifying to quash, beat down or destroy"

[Case v. Humphrey 6 Conn. 130; 3 Bl. Comm. 168]

Abate is both an English and French word and signifies in its proper sense to diminish or take away.

.............

VI. VENKATARAMAIYA''s Law Lexicon with Legal Maxims gives meaning of the word "abate" as destroy, quash''.

Hence, in Courts, the term "abate" is understood to mean,

"to put an end to its existence"

or

"quash"

or

"destroy".

6.

Hence, on and from 91st day, unless the abatement is set aside, the suit cannot be said to be pending. Or in other words, time does not run beyond 90 days so far as bringing on record the Legal Representatives in that suit is concerned. That being so, there is no question of filing a petition to condone the delay in filing the petition to bring on record the legal representatives. In fact, such a situation will never arise.

7.

In this view of the matter, there are no merits in the C.R.P. Consequently, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs.