V.MANJULA Vs. R.M RIDAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision is directed against the order passed by the learned Principal District Munsif, Tuticorin, rejecting the plaint in the unnumbered suit filed by the revision petitioner.

(2.) Despite notice to respondents, one Mr.S.Venkittu Indiramani, learned Counsel has filed vakalat for the second respondent and no one has appeared for the first respondent. Since first respondent is served and no Counsel has filed vakalat for him, the name of first respondent is printed in the cause list. There is no representation for the respondents, when the matter was called on several occasions and this Court, having regard to the nature of relief sought for, is not inclined to issue fresh notice to the respondents.

(3.) The revision petitioner filed a suit before the Principal District Munsif Court, Tuticorin for mandatory injunction directing the defendants in the suit to hand over the jewels and for costs. In the schedule of property, around 20 sovereigns of gold jewels with descriptions is given. The case of the revision petitioner in the plaint is that the defendants are the tenants under the revision petitioner and that they were residing in the first floor of the petitioner's residential building. It is the definite case of the revision petitioner that the defendants wanted a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- from the plaintiff as loan and that the revision petitioner handed over 20 sovereigns of gold, so that the same can be pledged by the defendants to mobilise the funds for their immediate need. The suit is for mandatory injunction to direct the defendants to return the gold jewels, which were handed over by the plaintiff to the defendants for mobilising the funds. Though a notice was sent by the plaintiff to the defendants prior to the suit, it is stated that no reply was given by the defendants.