V.Sahaya Stephen v. V.M.Sudhn @ Mariya Sudhan

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 17.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR and CMP(MD).No.19907 of 2025 V.Sahaya Stephen ... Petitioner Vs.

1.V.M.Sudhan @ V.Mariya Sudhan 2.Minor R.S.Aro Runish ... Respondents (R2 represents through his mother the natural guardian namely Sibla) PRAYER :-Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decretal order passed in I.A.No.2 of 2024 in O.S.No.245 of 2024 on the file of the IV Additional District Court, Tirunelveli dated 02.09.2025.

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Karthick Raja For Respondents : Ms.C.Karthiga Legal aid counsel

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed challenging the fair and decretal order passed in I.A. No. 2 of 2024 in O.S. No. 245 of 2024 on the file of the IV Additional District Court, Tirunelveli, dated 02.09.2025. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned 1/5

counsel for the respondents.

3.The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the petitioner has filed the suit for partition. The second defendant is the grandson and the first defendant is the brother of the plaintiff. The petitioner filed an application seeking an order for production of documents, namely, the adoption document of the second defendant, the birth certificate, Aadhaar card, and school records. The trial Court rejected the said application on the ground that these documents are public documents, which the revision petitioner can obtain by filing appropriate applications before the competent authorities, and that such documents can be marked subject to proof of relevancy during the trial. 4.The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that, if the petitioner intends to mark those documents, he can obtain the same by making proper applications before the concerned authorities and produce them before the trial Court. Hence, there is no necessity to interfere with the order passed by the trial Court.

5.A perusal of the records shows that the documents sought are public in nature. The revision petitioner can obtain the same by approaching the 2/5

competent authorities through appropriate applications. Therefore, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the order passed by the trial Court. 6.In view of the above, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 7.The Court places on record its appreciation for the commendable efforts of the legal aid counsel for the respondents, namely, Ms.C.Karthiga, for conducting the case diligently and providing valuable assistance to this Court. The High Court Legal Services Committee attached to this Bench shall pay a total sum of Rs.10,000/- towards remuneration to the legal aid counsel for conducting the cases, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, without fail.

8.Registry is directed to forward a copy of this order to the Legal Aid Committee for information.

Speaking : Yes / No 17.02.2026 NCC : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No TM 3/5

To 1.The IV Additional District Judge, Tirunelveli. 2.The Section Officer, E.R.Section/V.R.Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.

TM 17.02.2026 5/5