M.N.Palani v. T.Jospein

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 17.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR and C.M.P.No.12060 of 2024 M.N.Palani ... Petitioner vs.

T.Jospein ... Respondents PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 18.03.2024 passed by the District Munsif at Madurantakam in I.A.No.7 of 2024 in O.S.No.40 of 2017.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Chandra Sudan For Respondent : Mr.G.Mageshkumar

O R D E R

The Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the District Munsif, Madurantakam in I.A.No.7 of 2024 in O.S.No.40 of 2017, dated 18.03.2024 dismissing the application filed by the petitioner seeking issuance of summon to the Tahsildar, Madurantakam Taluk, to produce the original records relating to the documents mentioned in the petition.

1/4

2. The respondent herein filed a suit in O.S.No.40 of 2017 for permanent injunction against the petitioner. The respondent claims that she acquired right over the suit property under the Settlement Deed dated 12.01.2012 executed by her husband. The respondent also produced Patta No.297 stands in the name of her husband and marked the same as Ex.A2.

3. The petitioner herein has taken a specific stand in the written statement that patta produced by the respondent is not a genuine document. Therefore, the instant application has been filed by the petitioner seeking issuance of summon to the Tahsildar, Madurantakam Taluk, to find out the genuineness of the document filed by the respondent.

4. The copy of Patta No.297 marked as Ex.A2 has been produced in the typed-set of papers at Page No.52. A perusal of the same would indicate the said Patta No.297 is relating to Survey No.233/5. However, the suit has been filed in respect of Survey No.366/3A. Therefore, it is clear the Patta No.297 produced by the respondent is not relating to the suit property. 2/4

5. In such circumstances, the Court need not go to genuineness of the patta marked by the plaintiff, when it is not relating to the suit property. Therefore, the prayer sought for by the petitioner to issue summon to the Tahsildar, Madurantakam Taluk, to ascertain the genuineness of the documents appear to be not necessary.

6. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected civil miscellaneous petition is closed. 17.02.2026 Index : Yes / No Speaking order : Yes / No : Yes / No dm To The District Munsif, Madurantakam.

3/4

S.SOUNTHAR, J.

dm 17.02.2026 4/4