Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 17437 Mad
Judgement Date : 3 September, 2024
C.R.P.(MD)No.287 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dated : 03.09.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
C.R.P.(MD)No.287 of 2023
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.1376 of 2023
Thirumalai Kumar ... Petitioner/Petitioner/Appellant
Vs.
1.Ramesh
2.Sankaralingam
3.The Branch Manager,
Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank,
Pavoorchathiram,
Tenkasi Taluk,
Tenkasi District.
4.The Branch Manager,
Indian Overseas Bank,
Elanji, Tenkasi Taluk,
Tenkasi District.
5.The Branch Manager,
Indian Overseas Bank,
Tenkasi. ... Respondents/Respondents/Respondents
Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India, to set aside the judgment and decree dated 10-11-2022 passed in
I.A.No.1 of 2022 in on the file of the Learned Additional District Court (Fast
Track Court), Tenkasi and allow this Civil Revision Petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/4
C.R.P.(MD)No.287 of 2023
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Mohideen Basha
For Respondents : Mr.M.Saravanan for R1
Mr.N.C.Ashok Kumar for R2
Mr.S.Micheal Heldon Kumar for R3
No appearance for R4 & R5
***
ORDER
Heard both sides.
2.The appellant in A.S.No.54 of 2020 on the file of the Additional
District Court (Fast Tract Court), Tenkasi is the revision petitioner herein. The
first respondent herein filed O.S.No.119 of 2010 on the file of the Principal Sub
Court, Tenkasi seeking partition. Preliminary decree was passed on 13.01.2020.
The trial Court held that the Will propounded by the revision petitioner herein
was not proved. Questioning the said judgment and decree, the revision
petitioner herein filed A.S.No.54 of 2020. In the said first appeal, I.A.No.1 of
2021 under Order 76 of Civil Rules of Practice r/w. Section 151 of Civil
Procedure Code to send for certain documents. The petitioner's request was
negatived by the Court below vide order dated 10.11.2022. Challenging the
same, this civil revision petition came to be filed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3.The learned counsel for the revision petitioner reiterated all the
contentions set out in the grounds of revision.
4.Per contra, the learned counsel for the first respondent submitted that
the impugned order does not warrant interference.
5.I carefully considered the rival contentions and went through the
materials on record. In I.A.No.1 of 2021, the documents sought to be sent for
are the voucher said to have been signed by late.Pandiya Nadar by affixing his
thumb impression on 31.08.2006 and certain other records. According to the
petitioner, the documents are in the custody of Indian Overseas Bank, Elanji
Branch. The bank filed counter stating that the documents sought for by the
petitioner are not available. In these circumstances, the Court below rightly
dismissed I.A.No.1 of 2021. Interference is not warranted. The civil revision
petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition
is closed.
03.09.2024
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
ias
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
ias
To:
The Additional District Court (Fast Track Court), Tenkasi.
03.09.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!