Madras High Court
M.Rukmaniammal vs Idol Of The Arulmigu on 29 September, 2022
C.R.P(MD)No.1800 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dated : 29.09.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
C.R.P(MD)No.1800 of 2022
and
CMP(MD)No.8017 of 2022
M.Rukmaniammal ... Petitioner
Vs
Idol of the Arulmigu
Kalyana Pasupatheeswara Swamy,
Arulmigu Kalyana Pasupatheeswara
Swamy Devasthanam,
Represented by its Executive Officer
... Respondent
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227
of Constitution of India, to call for the records in OSSR
No.2259 of 2022 on the file of the learned Principal Sub
Judge, Trichy and quash the order dated 03.08.2022 and
consequently fix either the Court of the Sub Judge, Karur
or the Court of the Principal Sub Judge, Trichy, as the
appropriate Court for taking up the petitioner's plaint
seeking to declare the judgment and decree date 29.12.2003
passed in O.S.No.227 of 2003 on the file of the learned
Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirappalli as null and void.
For Petitioner : Mr.E.J.Ayyappan
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD)No.1800 of 2022
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition is filed as against the
order passed by the learned Principal Subordinate Judge,
Trichy in OSSR No.2259 of 2022, dated 03.08.2022.
2.This Court earlier rejected the civil revision
petition at the SR stage filed by the petitioner in
CRP(MD)SR.No.33030 of 2021 stating that this Court cannot
conduct an elaborate enquiry with regard to the averments
of fraud made therein, however, granted liberty to the
petitioner to approach the appropriate civil forum for
seeking the remedy by filing a suit seeking the relief of
declaration that the decree passed in O.S.No.227 of 2003
dated 29.12.2003 is null and void. The petitioner has also
filed a suit before the Sub Court, Karur for declaration
to declare the decree passed in O.S.No.227 of 2003 is non
est in law. The learned Sub Judge, Karur returned the
petition that the judgment, which sought to be declared as
null and void is passed by the Sub Judge, Tiruchirappalli
and therefore, the petitioner has to present the suit
before the Principal Sub Judge, Tiruchirappalli.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD)No.1800 of 2022
3.Accordingly, the petitioner has presented the suit
before the Principal Sub Court, Tiruchirappalli. However,
the Court has raised certain objections regarding the
maintainability that though the suit property is not within
its jurisdiction, the earlier suit was tried pursuant to
the directions of this Court. Therefore the petitioner is
before this Court with a prayer to direct any of the Courts
either at Karur or Tiruchirappalli to take the suit on file
and decide the issue on merits.
4.This Court considered the submissions of the learned
Counsel and perused the materials placed on record.
5.The petitioner has presented the suit with an
averment that the decree in the earlier suit in O.S.No.227
of 2003 was obtained by fraud. This Court in
CRP(MD)SR.No.33030 of 201 has also permitted the petitioner
to file a fresh suit challenging the decree passed in
O.S.No.227 of 2003. The Court at Karur returned the
petition stating that the decree, which is sought to be
questioned is passed by the Sub Court, Tiruchirappalli.
The Sub Court at Tiruchirappalli has returned that the suit
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD)No.1800 of 2022
in O.S.No.227 of 2003 was initially filed before the Sub
Court, Karur in O.S.NO.143 of 1989 and based on the orders
of this Court in CRP(MD)No.53 of 2003 it was transferred to
II Additional Sub Judge, Trichy and renumbered as
O.S.No.227 of 2003 and therefore the cause of action for
the suit did not arise within the jurisdiction of this
Court and further this Court in CRP(MD)SRNo.33030 of 2021
has directed to file a suit before the appropriate civil
court and this Court is not appropriate Court to file the
suit.
6.Though the suit property is situated in Karur
district, the decree, which is sought to be questioned
was passed by the learned II Additional Sub Court,
Tiruchirappalli. Therefore the learned Principal Sub Judge,
Tiruchirappalli is directed to entertain the suit, if it is
otherwise in order and proceed further.
7.The civil revision petition is allowed on the above
terms. No costs.
29.09.2022
dsk
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD)No.1800 of 2022
To
The Principal Sub Judge,
Tiruchirappalli.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD)No.1800 of 2022
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
dsk
C.R.P(MD)No.1800 of 2022
29..09.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
