K.V.Ramamurthy v. S.Parameswari
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 01-07-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI CRP No. 3557 of 2026 and CMP No.15502 of 2026
1. K.V.Ramamurthy s/o K.R.Veerasamy, Old Door No.56/ New Door No.57/A1, Naval Hospital Road, 1st lane, Periamet, Chennai - 600 003 Petitioner(s) Vs
1. S.Parameswari w/o Sarathy, New No.25, Old No.1/2, Naval Hospital Road, 1st lane, Periamet, Chennai - 600 003 Respondent(s) Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India to set aside the Docket Order dated 17.04.2026 of the Review Petition SR No.25542 of 2026 in O.S.No.2112 of 2018 on the file of XII Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai and further remit back the case to the trial court to hear the matter afresh and to decide the issue which was omitted.
For Petitioner(s):
M/s. M.B.Mushtaque Ahamed Samiullah.Z M.B.Anjumanra Begum 1/4
For Respondent(s):
Chennai
ORDER
The present revision petition challenges the order of return in the docket order in Review Application SR No.25542 of 2026 dated 17.04.2026.
2. The petitioner admittedly suffered a decree in O.S.No.2112 of 2018 on the file of 12th Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai and the petitioner filed a Review Application under Order 47 of Civil Procedure Code contending that one of the main issues has not been decided or answered as contemplated under Order 14 of Civil Procedure Code. The said application has been returned by the trial Court stating that the Review is not maintainable.
3. I do not see any error committed by the trial Court in not entertaining the Review Application Order 47 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code reads as under:- REVIEW 1 . Application for review of judgment- (1) Any person considering himself aggrieved- (a) by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed, but from which no appeal has been preferred, 2/4
(b) by a decree or order from which no appeal is allowed, or (c) by a decision on a reference from a Court of Small Causes, and who, from the discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of due diligence was not within his knowledge or could not be produced by him at the time when the decree was passed or order made, or on account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record of for any other sufficient reason, desires to obtain a review of the decree passed or order made against him, may apply for a review of judgment to the Court which passed the decree or made the order.
4. In my considered view, non-consideration of one of the issues or not answering one of the issues is not a ground for review. It may be affording an opportunity to prefer an appeal alone and the provisions of Order 47 of Civil Procedure Code cannot be invoked.
5. In the result, the civil revision petition is dismissed. However, this order will not come in the way of the petitioner filing a regular appeal. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 01.07.2026 sr Index:yes/no Website:yes/no Speaking Order/Non-speaking Order 3/4
P.B.BALAJI,J.
sr To The XII Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai CRP No. 3557 of 2026 01.07.2026 4/4