Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 44944 (MAD)

Mrs. V. Achuthamba and 3 others v. Mrs. V. Nagaratnam and 2 others

A/2721/2026 · 2026-07-06

Master

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 A.Nos.2721, 2722 & 2724 of 2026 in C.S DR.No.199136 of 2025 MASTER 06.07.2026 COMMON ORDER 1. There are three applications filed by the applicant. A.No.2721 of 2026 is filed to condone the delay of 10 days in payment of deficit court fee of Rs.700/-. The reason for the same is that it took some time for raising the funds to pay the deficit court fee. . 2. A.No.2722 of 2026 is filed by the applicant to condone the defective presentation in representing the suit. The reason stated is that at the time of re-presenting the papers mistakenly it was re-presented without obtaining the signature of Assistant Registrar (Original Side) and also for the earlier return for deficit court fee. 3. A.No.2724 of 2026 is filed to condone the delay of 22 days in representing the suit. The reason for the same is that the earlier returns by the Registry for paying deficit court fee has not been complied amongst other returns and also at the time of re-presenting the papers mistakenly it was re-presented without obtaining the signature of Assistant Registrar (Original Side) and also for the earlier return for deficit court fee. 4. The delay is only in refiling and not in filing. This court has come across many number of Judgment wherein the Hon'ble High Court has taken a lenient view in condoning the delay in representation. 5. Following the same analogy and also considering the fact that substantial court fee has already been paid in this case. This court is inclined to allow these https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2 applications. Accordingly, these 3 applications are allowed. No cost. MASTER https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis