S.Ponnusamy v. Ramalingam

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 08-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI and CMP.No.13818 of 2025 S.Ponnusamy S/o. Late.Sengan Padayachi, 64, Vijayapuram 7th Street, Chinnasalem, Kallakurichi Dist.

..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. Ramalingam S/o. Ramasamy, Kural Village, Chinnasalem Taluk, Kallakurichi Dist.

2. Kannan S/o. Iyyamperumal, Alampadi Village, Thittakudi Taluk, Cuddalore Dist.

Kolanjiammal (Died)

3. The State Government Rep by the District Collector, Villupuram

4. The Principal Accountant General (A and E), Chennai

5. The Additional Chief Educational Officer, Villupuram

6. The District Treasury Officer Villupuram

7. The Sub Treasury Officer, Kallakurichi ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, praying to set aside the order dated 20.12.2024 made in Memo in I.A No.

783 / 2021 in OS No. 270 of 2013 on the file of the Ld.Principal District Munsif Court, Kallakurichi by allowing this CRP For Petitioner(s):

MR.N.Manoharan For Respondent(s):

MR.S.VIJAYA KUMAR FOR R1 AND R2 MR.V.RAMESH GA FOR R3TO R7

ORDER

The Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order dated 20.12.2024 made in Memo in I.A No. 783 / 2021 in OS No. 270 of 2013 on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif Court, Kallakurichi.

2. The revision petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S. Nos. 270 of 2013 and 75 of 2013, wherein the defendants are one and the same in both suits. Trial has commenced, and evidence has been recorded in O.S. No. 75 of 2013 as well as in I.A. No. 851 of 2021. The petitioner also filed a memo seeking to adopt the same evidence in the connected proceedings, namely in I.A.No.783 of 2021 in O.S. No. 270 of 2013, since the parties are identical.

3. Though the trial Court accepted the memo, it granted liberty to the defendants to adduce further evidence in O.S. No. 270 of 2013. In O.S. No. 75 of 2013, the evidence has already been closed and the matter is posted for arguments. Aggrieved by the liberty granted to the defendants, the present

revision has been filed.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the trial Judge ought to have posted both suits for arguments instead of granting liberty to the defendants to adduce further evidence in O.S.No.270 of 2013. However, the relief claimed in O.S. No. 270 of 2013 relates to family pension, whereas O.S. No. 75 of 2013 is a comprehensive suit in which evidence has already been recorded.

5. In such circumstances, if the defendants have any further evidence to adduce in O.S. No. 270 of 2013, they may be permitted to do so; failing which, multiplicity of proceedings would arise. Accordingly, the defendants are granted two weeks time from the date of receipt of a copy of this order to adduce further evidence, if any.

6. If no further evidence is adduced within the said period, the trial Court is directed to adopt the evidence recorded in I.A. No.851 of 2021 in O.S.No.75 of 2013 for I.A.No.783 of 2021 in O.S.No.270 of 2013. Thereafter, the trial Court shall dispose of I.A.Nos.783 of 2021 and 851 of 2021 in accordance with law within a period of four weeks and proceed with the trial in both suits.

7. In view of the above direction, this civil revision petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs. 08-04-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order MPA

To

1. The Principal District Munsif Court, Kallakurichi

1. The State Government Rep by the District Collector, Villupuram

2. The Principal Accountant General (A and E), Chennai

3. The Additional Chief Educational Officer, Villupuram

4. The District Treasury Officer Villupuram

5. The Sub Treasury Officer, Kallakurichi

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

MPA and CMP.No.13818 of 2025 08-04-2026