R.Mohan v. N. Purushothaman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27-03-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI AND CMP NO. 30676 OF 2025 R.Mohan Managing Trustee of Thiruneelakandar Trust, S/O. Radhakrishnan, No.5, Gopal Street, T.Nagar, Chennai - 600014. ..Petitioner(s) Vs N. Purushothaman S/O. C.P. Natarajan, No.1/1, Sivagnanam Street, T.Nagar, Chennai - 600017.
..Respondent(s) PRAYER Civil Revision Petition filed under Art. 227 of Constitution of India, praying to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 25.09.2025 passed by the learned III Assistant Judge, City Civil Court Chennai in IA No.2/2024 in OS No.4455/2023.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.T.Jayaramaraj For Mr.Nanchil J. Deekashith For Respondent(s):
Mr.C.Sivanesan
ORDER
Challenging the impugned order passed in I.A.No.2 of 2024 in O.S.No.4455 of 2023 by the learned III Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, the Revision Petitioner/plaintiff preferred this Civil Revision Petition.
2.Before the trial court, the Revision Petitioner/plaintiff filed an application under Order VII Rule 14 (3) of C.P.C. seeking to receive additional documents, which was denied by the trial judge. Aggrieved over that, he preferred this civil revision petition.
3.The learned counsel for revision petitioner/plaintiff would submit that before commencement of trial, he wanted to produce additional documents, which is relating to the plaintiff's claim, but the court below failed to receive the same and also failed to give such opportunity and erroneously held that at the belated stage, those documents were furnished. Hence, he prayed to set aside the findings of trial judge.
4. The learned counsel for respondent/defendant would submit that with regard to the additional documents, there is no pleadings in the plaint. Therefore, the trial judge has rightly dismissed the application and prayed to dismiss this civil revision petition as no merit.
5. Heard and considered rival submissions made on either side and perused the materials available on record.
6.Considering the facts and on perusal of records, it is a suit filed by the revision petitioner/plaintiff in O.S.No.4455 of 2023 against the respondent/defendant for the relief of recovery of arrears of rent along with consequential relief. At the stage of pre-trial, he wanted to file additional documents viz., payment receipts, donation receipts and property tax receipt etc., which are necessary to prove his claim. By producing those documents, he is entitled to contest the suit before the trial court. Therefore, before the trial court, parties are to be given fair opportunity to prove their case. The revision petitioner/plaintiff approached the court for recovery of possession as well as for rental arrears.
So, the necessity arose for him to produce those documents besides, it is pre-trial stage and at that stage, no prejudice would be caused to the respondent/defendant. But the trial court failed to give such opportunity. Considering that, this court is inclined to set aside the findings rendered in I.A.No.2 of 2024 in O.S.No.4455 of 2023 by the III Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed. Liberty is granted to the revision petitioner/plaintiff to file any additional reply statement. Both parties are directed to cooperate with the trial proceedings. The trial judge is directed to complete the trial and dispose the case within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, since there is rent arrears according to plaintiff. No costs.
Consequently, connected civil miscellaneous petition is closed.
27-03-2026
Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order RPP To The III Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.
T.V.THAMILSELVI J.
RPP AND CMP NO. 30676 OF 2025 27-03-2026