Murugaiyan v. Rajamani

ORDER The Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the trial Court dismissing the application filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the District Collector to depute a competent official to give evidence and produce certain records under Order XVI Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

2.The respondents 1 to 7/plaintiffs filed a suit seeking declaration of title and permanent injunction. They also sought a declaration that the sale deed executed in favour of the petitioner/third defendant is null and void. Pending suit, the petitioner filed an application seeking a direction to the District Collector to depute a competent official to give evidence along with certain documents mentioned in the petition, namely, the certified copy of the order passed by this Court in S.T.A. No.142 of 1958, copies of the records relating to Inam Abolition proceedings concerning the suit property, and copies of the patta issued in favour of certain individuals after the Inam Abolition proceedings. The said application was dismissed by the trial Court on the ground that the petitioner had not followed the procedure contemplated under Rules 75(3) and 76 of the Civil Rules of Practice. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has filed the present Civil Revision Petition.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that when the petitioner was examined as D.W.1, certain questions were put to him regarding the initiation of the Inam Abolition proceedings. According to the petitioner, the questions proceeded on the footing that the Inam Abolition proceedings were initiated only during the years 1968–1969. However, according to the petitioner, the Inam Abolition proceedings relating to the suit property were actually initiated in the year 1948. It was further submitted that the proceedings before the Inam Abolition Tribunal ended in favour of the petitioner's predecessor-in-title and that the appeal preferred by the District Collector in S.T.A. No.142 of 1958 was also dismissed. Therefore, according to the petitioner, the order passed in S.T.A. No. 142 of 1958 and the records relating to the Inam Abolition proceedings are highly relevant for establishing his case.

¶4If the petitioner intends to produce the order passed in S.T.A. No.142 of 1958, he can very well file the necessary third-party application before this Court, obtain a certified copy of the said order and produce the same before the trial Court. The respondents have referred to the said order in S.T.A. No.142 of 1958 in their written statement filed as early as the year 2019. However, till date, the petitioner has not taken any steps to obtain a certified copy of the said order and produce the same in support of his defence.

¶5Insofar as the other documents are concerned, it is always open to the petitioner to obtain certified copies from the concerned authorities by following the procedure prescribed under Rule 76 of the Civil Rules of Practice and produce the same before the trial Court. When the petitioner has an effective remedy to secure certified copies of the required documents by following the procedure contemplated under Rules 75(3) and 76 of the Civil Rules of Practice, he is not entitled to seek a direction to the District Collector to depute a competent official to give evidence along with the documents required by him. The trial Court, by rightly relying upon Rules 75(3) and 76 of the Civil Rules of Practice, dismissed the application filed by the petitioner. I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the trial Court warranting interference.

¶6Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

07.07.2026 Index :Yes / No Internet :Yes / No NCC :Yes / No skn To

1.The IV Additional Subordinate Court, Tiruchirappalli.

2.The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. S.SOUNTHAR,

J.

skn C.R.P.(MD)No.1723 of 2026 and C.M.P(MD)No.8293 of 2026

07.07.2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.07.2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR C.R.P.(MD)No.1723 of 2026 and C.M.P(MD)No.8293 of 2026 Murugaiyan .. Petitioner Vs. 1.Rajamani 2.S.Nagarajan 3.Vallavan 4.Mallika 5.Devika 6.R.Venkatesan 7.R.M.Sivasekari 8.D.Gilbert S.K.N.S.Sekappan (died) 9.The State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by the District Collector, Collector's Office, Tiruchirappalli. 10.The Registrar, Registrar Office, Cantonment, Trichy. 11.The Sub Registrar, Thiruverumbur, Trichy. 12.Padmavathy 13.Abhirami 14.Karthick .. Respondents PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 18.04.2026 in I.A.No.13 of 2026 in O.S.No.618 of 2017 on the file of the IV Additional Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirappalli. For Petitioner : Mr.B.Sekar For Respondents : Mr.L.Siva Govt. Advocate (civil) for R9 to R11 * * *