← Library
Madras High CourtCRP/548/2026dismissed

Murugesan (Died), 1. M. Prema v. Palaniappan

2026-06-08Honourable Mr Justice Abdul Quddhose4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 08-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE CRP No. 548 of 2026 AND CMP NO. 2918 OF 2026 Murugesan (Died)

1. M. Prema

2. M.Rubimala

3. M.Divyamala (Minor) Minor rep. by mother and natural guardian M.Prema.

4. M.Bavyamala (Minor) Minor rep. by mother and natural guardian M.Prema ..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. Palaniappan

2. Araayammal

3. Mariyammal ..Respondent(s) To allow the Civil Revision Petition by setting aside the fair and decretal order dated 10.10.2025 made in I.A.No.10 of 2025 in O.S.No.407 of 2015 on the file of the Hon'ble District Munsif Court, Dharapuram. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.N.Kumar For Respondent(s):

Mr.M.Muthappan

Order This Civil Revision Petition has been filed, challenging the impugned order dated 10.10.2025 passed by the District Munsif Court, Dharapuram in I.A.No.10 of 2025 in O.S.No.407 of 2015.

2.Under the impugned order, the application filed by the petitioner seeking to re-open and re-call the plaintiffs' witness has been dismissed on the following grounds:

a)The application has been filed belatedly in the argument stage i.e. after a lapse of more than 10 years from the year of the suit; b)The details of the documents to be marked as exhibits on the side of the petitioners have not been disclosed in the affidavit filed in support of I.A. No.10 of 2025.

3.Admittedly, the suit is of the year 2015. The petitioners are the plaintiffs in the suit. Originally, the suit was filed by one Murugesan deceased for declaring the settlement deed executed by the defendants in favour of his daughters as null and void. The petitioners ought to have filed the documents in support of the suit at the earliest instance. If they have not filed the same along with the suit at the time of filing of the suit, they ought to have filed the same with the leave of the court within a reasonable time.

4.Admittedly, the application seeking to re-open and re-call the plaintiffs' witnesses was filed only in the arguments stage. The Trial Court has rightly rejected the application by giving the aforementioned reasons. This Court does not find any infirmity in the impugned order. Accordingly, this civil revision petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected CMP is closed. No costs. 08-06-2026 VGA To 1.The District Munsif court, Dharapuram.

2.The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Madras.

ABDUL QUDDHOSE J.

VGA AND CMP NO. 2918 OF 2026 08-06-2026