Murugan v. S.Murugan

ORDER This civil revision petition has been filed to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 30.06.2025 made in unnumbered original suit (CNR No. TNTS 070002812025) (SR Nos. 1887 2024 2630 and 4087) on the file of the Sub Court Sankarankovil and allow the above Civil Revision Petition.

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the respondents and perused the records.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the impugned order dated 30.06.2025, the relevant portion is extracted hereunder. @thjp jug;g[ nfl;fg;gl;lJ/ tHf;Ff; nfhg;g[fs; ghprPypf;fg;gl;ld/ ,e;j tHf;fhdJ. tHf;Fiu Mtz vz;/1 Mf jhf;fy; bra;ag;gl;l jhth fhnrhiyapd;

mog;gilapy;

thjpahy; gpujpthjpfSf;F vjpuhf U:/9.00.000/? bjhifia tN:ypf;ff; nfhhp jhf;fy; bra;ag;gl;Ls;sJ/ jhth fhnrhiyahdJ fle;j 10/03/2022 Mk; njjpad;W

gpujpthjpfshy;

vGjpf; bfhLf;fg;gl;Ls;sJ/

jhth

fhnrhiyapd; mog;gilapy;

tHf;FiuahdJ

chpa fhytuk;g[f;Fs; fle;j 07/03/2025k; njjpad;W jhf;fy; bra;ag;gl;Ltpl;l nghjpYk;. thjpahy; ePjpkd;wf; fl;lzk; vJt[k; brYj;jg;gltpy;iy vdnt tHf;FiuahdJ 08/03/2025 kw;Wk; 09/03/2025 Mfpa ,U jpd';fSk; (rdp kw;Wk; "hapW) tpLKiw jpd';fs; vd;gjhy; 11/03/2025 njjpad;W kPz;Lk; ePjpkd;wj;jpy; jhf;fy; bra;ag;gl;lJ/ jhth fhnrhiyapd; mog;gilapy; tHf;Fiu ePjpkd;wf; fl;lzkhdJ 09/03/2025 njjpf;Fs; brYj;jg;gl;oUf;f ntz;Lk;/ Mdhy; tHf;Fiuf;fhd ePjpkd;wf; fl;lzkhdJ chpa fhytuk;gpw;Fs; fl;lhky; fhytuk;g[ jhz;o 13/03/2025k;

njjpad;W

brYj;jg;gl;Ls;sJ/ vdnt. ,e;j tHf;FiuahdJ fhytuk;g[ njhc&j;jhy; ghjpf;fgl;lLs;sJ/ vdnt 13/03/2025k; njjpad;W brYj;jg;gl;l ePjpkd;wf; fl;lzkhdJ fhyhtjpnjhc&j;jhy; ghjpf;fg;gl;Ls;sJ/ 2/nkYk; thjp jug;gpy; tHf;if chpa fhytiuaiwf;Fs; jhf;fy; bra;ag;gl;lLtpl;ljhy; tHf;Fiu nfhg;g[f;F vLff; g;gl ntz;Lbkd;Wk;. ,J rk;ge;jkhf Rl;of;fhl;lg;gl;l Kd; tHf;Ffspy; Palanisamyo/Vs/Kailaperumaloono07oMarch,o2007 vd;w tHf;fpid ghprPyid bra;ifapy; ePjpkd;w fl;lzk; fhytiuaiwf;Fs; brYj;jg;glhjnghJ tHf;Fiu epuhfhpff; g;glyhk; vd;nw fz;Ls;sJ/ nkYk;. thjp jug;gpy; Rl;off; hl;lg;gl;l kw;bwhU Kd;jPh;g;ghd Durai o & o Others o /Vs/ o Muthayya o datedo

15.03.2022 vd;w tHf;F ,e;j tHf;fpd; bghUz;ikf;F bghUe;Jtjhf ,y;iy/ 3/vdnt thjp jug;gpy; Twg;gl;Ls;sJnghy; tHf;FiuahdJ chpa fhytiuaiwf;Fs; jhf;fy; bra;ag;gl;Ltpl;lhy; tHf;Fiu nfhg;g[f;F vLf;fg;glntz;Lbkd;W brhy;yg;gLfpw r'f; jpfs; Vwf; j;jf;fjy;y/ 4/vdnt nkw;fz;l ghprPyidfspypUe;J tHf;Fiu ePjpkd;wf; fl;lzkhdJ chpa fhytuk;g[f;Fs; jhf;fy; bra;ag;gltpy;iy vd;gjhy; ,e;j tHf;Fiu epuhfhpf;fj;jf;fJ vd ,e;ePjpkd;wk; Kot[f;F tUfpwJ/@

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the application was not numbered and, according to him, the same was filed within the prescribed time. However, the trial Court dismissed the application.

5.In order to substantiate his contention, the learned counsel relied upon the order passed by this Court in the case of Jeyalakshmi Vs. Ramalakshmi and others in CRP(MD).No. 2046 of 2025, particularly paragraph No. 7, which is extracted hereunder. "7. The issue arises in the present petition is no longer res integra in view of the decisions rendered in the decisions (supra), in Paragraph Nos. 4 to 6 in 2024 Supreme (online) (MAD) 19393 – Supreme Today [T.Sudhakar v. M.Sheshadri] and in Para 4 in 2025 Supreme (online) (MAD) 969 – Supreme Today [M.Abdul Rahman v. C.Santhi]. In view of the settled proposition of law and in view of the aforesaid decisions, rejection of the plaint without numbering the suit is not sustainable one. It is clear violation of the mandate of law. Hence, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed and the impugned rejection made by the trial Court vide order dated 17.03.2025 is set aside. The trial Court is directed to number the suit and dispose the same as expeditiously as possible. No costs."

6.On a perusal of the said order, this Court finds that it has been observed therein that the claim made is not sustainable and that there is a clear violation of the mandatory provisions. It was further held that such factual aspects are to be decided by the trial Court.

7.Therefore, the decision relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner does not support the case of the revision petitioner. Further, the prayer in the present petition seeks to set aside the detailed final order. As against such a final order, the proper remedy available to the revision petitioner is to file an appeal.

8.Hence, this Civil Revision Petition is not maintainable and the same is liable to be dismissed.

9.Accordingly, this civil revision petition is dismissed. No costs. Speaking : Yes / No

24.02.2026 NCC : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No TM To

1.The Subordinate Judge, Sankarankovil.

2.The Section Officer, E.R.Section/V.R.Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

N.SENTHILKUMAR, J. TM

24.02.2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 24.02.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR Murugan ... Plaintiff Vs. 1.S.Murugan 2.S.Indira ... Respondents PRAYER :-Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 30.06.2025 made in unnumbered original suit (CNR No. TNTS 070002812025) (SR Nos. 1887 2024 2630 and 4087) on the file of the Sub Court Sankarankovil and allow the above Civil Revision Petition. For Petitioners : Mr.B.Arun