Ravikumar v. Gangammal

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 15.04.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR and CMP(MD).No.4037 of 2025 Ravikumar .... Petitioner//3rd Respondent/2nd Defendant -vs1.Gangammal 2.Mahalakshmi

...Respondents 1& 2/Petitioners

/Defendants 6 & 7 3.Usharani ...3rd Respondent/1st Respondent/Plaintiff Chinnasamy (died) 4.Vijayarani 5.Guruvammal 6.A.Chandran ....Respondents 4 -6/Respondents 4-6 /Defendants 3-5 PRAYER: The Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal order of passed in I.A.No.11 of 2024 in O.S.No.90 of 2012 dated 09.01.2025 on the file of the Sub Judge, Kovilpatti.

1/5

For Petitioner : Mrs.Lakshmi Gopinathan For M/s.Polex Legal Solutions For Respondents : Mr.F.X.Eugene for R1 & R2 : No appearance for R3 to R6

O R D E R

The second defendant in O.S.No.90 of 2012 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Kovilpatti has filed the present civil revision petition challenging the allowing of an application filed by the defendants 6 to 7 for reception of five documents.

2.A perusal of the records reveal that the suit is for partition and when it was posted for defendants' side evidence, the defendants 6 and 7 have filed I.A.No.11 of 2024 for reception of five documents. This application came to be allowed by the trial Court. Challenging the same, the present civil revision petition has been filed. 3.According to the revision petitioner, the petitioner has got serious objections with regard to all the documents, especially the document dated 11.05.1969 which is said to have been sent by the first defendant to the District Collector, Tirunelveli. The said document is an unsigned document and it is a xerox copy. Therefore, the genuineness, 2/5

validity and admissibility of the document are in dispute. 4.Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents brought to the notice of the Court that these documents have already been marked on 05.03.2025 subject to the objection that were raised by the learned counsel for the second defendant.

5.Heard both sides and perused the material records. 6.Considering the fact that these documents have already been marked subject to the objection raised by the second defendant, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the said order. It is open to the second respondent to raise the issue relating to the genuineness, validity and admissibility of the document during trial and it shall be decided by the trial Court.

7.With the above said observations, this civil revision petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

15.04.2025 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No NCC : Yes/No msa 3/5

To 1.The Subordinate Judge Kovilpatti 2.The Record Keeper, Vernacular Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J msa and CMP(MD).No.4037 of 2025 15.04.2025 5/5