K.Goutham Kumar v. V. Baskaran

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 18-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI CRP Nos.1399 & 1400 of 2026 & CMP.No.6806 of 2026 K.Goutham Kumar Sole Proprietor, Brand Equities, No.105, 4th Avenue, Shanthi Colony, Anna Nagar, Chennai - 040.

..Petitioner(s) in both CRPs Vs

1. V. Baskaran B-Block, Rain Tree Apartment, Sangam Street,Ambattur, Chennai - 053, Also also residing, AGN Dhanalakshmi, Plot No.17B, Block B-2, Valliyammai Street, Gangai Nagar, Kallikuppam, Ambattur, Chennai -053.

2. V. Balamurugan No.33A, Vellore Street, Thanjavur, Thanjavur District - 003.

..Respondent(s) in both CRPs

Common Prayer : Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to set aside the impugned fair and decreetal order dated 19.02.2026 made in IA Nos.4 & 5 of 2026 in OS No.450 of 2025 passed by the Learned XX Assistant City Civil Judge, Allikulam, Chennai by allowing this CRPs.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.G.Balamanikandan [in both CRPs.]

ORDER

Challenging the impugned Order passed in I.A.Nos.4 and 5 of 2026 in O.S.No.450 of 2025 dated 19.02.2026, the present Civil Revision Petitions have been filed by the plaintiff.

2. The petitioner/plaintiff filed the suit for permanent injunction to restrain the defendants and their men from interfering and disturbing with the plaintiff without due process of law. Pending suit, the defendants filed applications to reopen the evidence on the side of the plaintiff and to recall P.W.1 for further cross examination. Considering the submissions on either side, the trial Court had allowed the applications. Aggrieved over the same, the present revision petitions have been filed by the petitioner.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the trial without considering the fact that P.W.1 was elaborately cross examined on two occasions and after the evidence on the both sides has been closed and after completion of arguments on the side of the plaintiff, allowed the applications filed to reopen the evidence on the side of the plaintiff and recall P.W.1 for further cross examination, which has to be set aside. Admittedly, in the suit evidence on both sides has been completed and plaintiff's arguments was heard and when the matter was posted for defendant's side arguments, the defendants have filed applications to reopen the evidence on the side of the plaintiff and to recall P.W.1 for further cross examination. The contention of the defendants is that since some vital questions have to be put forth to P.W.

1, they sought to reopen evidence on the side of the plaintiff and to recall P.W.1 for further cross examination. The trial Court in order to give an opportunity to the defendants to prove their case had allowed the applications and the same requires no interference.

Accordingly, these Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 18-03-2026

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order vrc To The XX Assistant Judge, City Civil court, Chennai.

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

vrc 18-03-2026