- Case number
- (T)CMA(TM) 11/2023
- Court
- Madras High Court
- Date of judgment
- Judge
- Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
- Outcome
- Dismissed
Headnote
The Registrar's restoration, on review, of an application treated as abandoned for want of prosecution was upheld. Rule 56(3) of the 2002 Rules says an application 'may be treated as abandoned', which vests a discretion and creates no deemed abandonment, unlike section 21(2) of the Act or Rule 45 of the 2017 Rules. With no provision in the Act to set aside an ex parte order and no grounds of review in section 127(c), the third ground in Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, any other sufficient reason, was properly invoked.
Disposition
Appeal dismissed; the impugned order allowing review held not to call for interference.
Headnote by BRB Legal, written from the judgment: a summary for reference, not legal advice. Read the judgment itself before relying on it.