R.Leelavathi @ Leela v. A.Mohanasundaram

ORDER This civil revision petition has been filed, challenging the impugned order dated 27.11.2025 passed by the IV Additional District Judge, Tiruvallur at Ponneri in I.A. No. 6 of 2024 in O.S. No. 198 of 2021.

¶2The aforesaid application was filed by the defendants in the suit, seeking to eschew one of the documents, which was marked as an exhibit on the side of the plaintiff. The said document was marked as Exhibit A-8.

¶3The petitioners claim that being a document insufficiently stamped, the said document ought not to have been marked as an exhibit by the trial court.

¶4Admittedly, the said document was allowed to be marked as an exhibit earlier. However, according to the petitioners, the document was marked as an exhibit in the presence of the junior counsel of the counsel on record for the defendants. According to the petitioners, the trial court ought to have convinced itself that the document could be marked and only thereafter ought to have marked the same as an exhibit. According to the petitioners, the trial court failed to appreciate that the document cannot be marked as an exhibit as the said document has been insufficiently stamped.

¶5Having allowed the document to be marked as an exhibit, the petitioners cannot subsequently file an application, seeking to eschew Exhibit A-8. The contentions that have been raised by the petitioners before this court in this civil revision petition can very well be raised at the time of final arguments in the main suit.

¶6If such kind of revision petitions are entertained, it will only lead to delay in the finality of any litigation. Therefore, this court is not entertaining this civil revision petition, as the trial court has rightly rejected the petitioners' application. However, this court grants liberty for the petitioners to raise all contentions with regard to the inadmissibility of Exhibit A-8 in the final arguments to be made in the main suit. However, it is for the trial court to decide whether there is any merit in the petitioners' contention while deciding the main suit.

¶7This court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioners' contentions as raised before this court in this civil revision petition.

¶8For the foregoing reasons, this civil revision petition is disposed of by granting liberty for the petitioners to raise all contentions that have been raised in this civil revision petition in the main arguments to be made in the main suit, leaving it open for the trial court to decide whether the said contentions deserve merit or not while deciding the final suit. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 04-06-2026 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes ab To

¶1The IV Additional District Judge, Tiruvallur at Ponneri.

¶2The Section Officer, V.R. Section, Madras High Court. CRPeNo.e2154eofe2026 ABDULoQUDDHOSEoJ. ab CRPoNo.o2154oofo2026 ANDoCMPoNO.o9426oOFo 2026 04-06-2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 04-06-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE AND CMP NO. 9426 OF 2026 1. R.Leelavathi @ Leela 2. R. Dhineswaran 3. R. Easwaran @ Haribalaji Petitioner(s) Vs 1. A.Mohanasundaram Respondent(s) PRAYER Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the fair order and decreetal order passed in IA.No.6/2024 in OS.NO.198/2021 dated 27.11.2025 on the file of the IV Additional District Judge, Tiruvallur at Ponneri by allowing this appeal. For Petitioner(s): Mr.B.Govindaprabu For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Munuswamy