G.P.S. Garudapparamanujam v. Sengamalam Janaki (Died), Jeyam (Died) 1. Periyathiruvadi

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR and C.M.P.(MD)No.644 of 2026 G.P.S.Garudapparamanujam ... Petitioner -vs.- Sengamala Janaki (Died) Jeyam (Died) 1.Periyathiruvadi 2.Sampathkumar 3.Sadagopan 4.Venkatesh Azhagiyasingh 5.Thiruvadi 6.Azhagiya Singamraman Thiruvenkadam (Died) G.P.S.Azhwan (Died) G.P.S.Srinivasaraghavan (Died) G.P.S.Periyathiruvadi (Died) 7.Geetha @ Alamelu 8.Seema 9.Andal 10.G.A.Devapiran 11.G.A.Aravinthan 12.G.A.Govindhan 13.G.A.Alagurathi 14.G.A.Mangaladeeparaja

15.Geetha Nachiyar 16.G.P.S.S.Santhiyanarayanan

...Respondents

PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India to set aside fair order and decreetal order dated 28.11.2025 passed in I.A.No.15 of 2025 in O.S.No.349 of 2023 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Srivaikundam.

For Petitioner :Mrs.J.Anandhavalli For R1 to R6 :Mr.K.Boobalan for Mr.K.Kumaravel

ORDER

The present Civil Revision Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Srivaikundam. in I.A.No.15 of 2025 in O.S.No.349 of 2023, dated 28.11.2025. 2.The respondents 1 to 6 are the plaintiffs in the suit in O.S.No.349 of 2023. The petitioner and the respondents 7 to 16 are the defendants in the suit. The suit has been filed for declaration of title and for recovery of possession. During the pendency of the suit, the defendants took out an application in I.A.No.15 of 2025 under Order VI Rule 4 CPC seeking to strike off the plaint. The learned Subordinate Judge, Srivaikundam, vide

order, dated 18.08.2022, had dismissed the said application. Challenging the same, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed. 3.Heard the learned counsel on either side.

4.On a perusal of the pleadings and the nature of the dispute, it is evident that there exists a serious title dispute between the parties with regard to the suit property. Determination of such title involves appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, which cannot be undertaken in a summary proceeding under the revisional jurisdiction. It is well settled that the scope of a Civil Revision Petition is limited and this Court, while exercising its supervisory/revisional jurisdiction, cannot adjudicate upon disputed questions of title. Such issues are to be decided only in appropriate proceedings before the competent civil court after full-fledged trial.

5.In the present case, since the core issue revolves around title, this Court is not inclined to go into the merits of the rival claims. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to work out his remedy before the appropriate forum in the

manner known to law. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

27.02.2026 Internet :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No Index :Yes/No mm To Subordinate Judge, Srivaikundam

N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.

mm 27.02.2026