PALANISAMY Vs. MUTHUSAMY GOUNDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order passed by the lower court in allowing the application on condition that the petitioner has to deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/- out of the suit claim of Rs.65,000/- and also to pay a sum of Rs.1000/- to the Kangayam Taluk Legal Aid Committee and a sum of Rs.1000/- to the respondent towards costs on or before 11.03.2010 in default to dismiss the said application.

(2.) HEARD Mr.N. Manoharan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.A.P. Thangavel, learned counsel for the respondent.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the respondent/plaintiff would submit in his argument that the lower court has correctly come to the conclusion after going through the conduct of the petitioner and had imposed the condition against the petitioner and the discretion was correctly exercised by the lower court by following the judgments of this court reported in 2000 (I) CTC 277 in between A.R. Rajasakaran vs. I.C.d. Triplicane Branch, 2007 (4) CTC 148 in between K.M. Palanisamy vs. P. Sengottaiyan and 2010 (3) CTC 769 in between Pradeep Kumar and another vs. Balasundaram. He would therefore, request the court that the order passed by the lower court to deposit Rs.25,000/- out of the suit claim along with payment of cost of Rs.1000/- each to the Kangayam Taluk Legal Aid Committee and the respondent are lawfully exercised by the court and therefore, they need not be interfered.