Vivek v. Radha

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED :21.01.2016 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA C.R.P(PD).No.73 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.378 of 2016 Vivek .. Petitioner/Defendant Vs.

Radha .. Respondent/Plaintiff Prayer:- This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to number the un-numbered I.A.No. of 2015 (I.A.SR.No.7595 of 2015) in O.S.No.184 of 2014 on the file of the Sub-Court, Cheyyar, Tiruvannamalai District.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Venkat

O R D E R

Civil Revision Petition is filed to number the un-numbered I.A.No. of 2015 (I.A.SR.No.7595 of 2015) in O.S.No.184 of 2014 on

the file of the Sub-Court, Cheyyar, Tiruvannamalai District. 2.At the time of admission, argument of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner is heard in length. 3.The respondent herein as a plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.184 of 2014 for recovery of money due on mortgage deed against the legal heir of the mortgagor, since the mortgagor died. The defendant/revision petitioner filed a written statement and contesting the same. When the matter was posted for trial, the defendant filed an application under Order 13 Rule 10(1) C.P.C. and Rule 74 of Civil Rules of Practice to summon records viz., (i) Memo dated 30.07.2003 filed by the plaintiff; (ii) Endorsement made in the Court bundle by the counsel for plaintiff on 30.07.2003; (iii) Endorsement made in the Court bundle by the plaintiff on 30.07.2003 in O.S.No.

29 of 2003 pending on the file of the SubCourt, Arani, Tiruvannamalai District. That application was taken on file and the same was returned on 04.12.2015 stating that how the petition is maintainable. The same has been complied with and it was represented on 11.12.2015, which reads as follows: "S.R.No.

of the Plaintiff, it is just and necessary to bringing the Memo and endorsement made in the case bundle of O.S.No.29 of 2003 of Sub-Court, Arani. The documents are essential for proving the case of this petitioner and also proving the genuineness of the mortgage deed dated 02.06.2003.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India's judgment in AIR 2009 SC 2352 and judgments of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras (i) 2006 (1) MLJ 379 (2) CRP (PD) No.1348 of 2005 clearly states that:

a) "if bringing on record a document is essential for providing the case by a party, ordinarily the same should not be refused."

b) "The original deed of surrender is very much essential."

Hence the petition is maintainable. Complied with and represented."

That application was returned on 18.12.2015 stating that previous return was not complied with. The defendant/revision petitioner instead of representing the same, has come forward with the present revision for directing the trial Court to number the unnumbered I.A.

4.Considering the aforestated circumstances of the case, once the application has been returned on 18.12.2015, instead of representing the same, the revision petitioner has come forward with the present revision. So the revision itself is not maintainable. Therefore, the revision petitioner is directed to represent the same after rectifying the defects mentioned by the trial Court and on receipt of the same, the trial Court is directed to proceed in accordance with law.

5.With the above direction, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. The Registry is directed to return the original petition filed by the revision petitioner before this Court. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 21.01.2016 kj Index:Yes/No To The Sub-Court, Cheyyar, Tiruvannamalai District.

R.MALA,J.

kj C.R.P(PD).No.73 of 2016 and C.M.P.No.378 of 2016 21.01.2016