Madras High Court
CRP/515/2026 of V.R.Haribabu Vs Yadamani Nagalakshmi on 16 October 2026
CRP No. 515 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 16-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
CRP No. 515 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA013154362025}
AND
CMP NO. 2758 OF 2026
1. V.R.Haribabu
S/o Late V.Ramachandran
2. V.R.Nagarajan
S/o Late V.Ramachandran
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. Yadamani Nagalakshmi
W/o Y.Sri Ramkumar
2. N.Shalini
D/o Late V.R.Rajan
3. V.R.Poornachandran
S/o Late V.R.Rajan
4. R.Vidya Sathishkumar
W/o Late V.R.Sathish
5. Master V.S.Sridharth rep by its
Natural guardian his mother R.Vidya
sathishkumar
..Respondent(s)
Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the order dated 22.09.2025 passed in IA.No.2/2024 in
CRP No. 515 of 2026
OS.No.2802/2024 on the file of VII Assistant City Civil Court at Chennai by allowing this CRP.
For Petitioner(s):
M/s.T.Jayanthi
For Respondent(s):
Ms.G.Saibaba for R1
Mr.P.C.Ramesh for R2 and R3
R4 and R5 served -No appearance
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Order
This Civil Revision Petition has been filed challenging the fair and decretal order passed in IA.No.2 of 2024 in OS.No.2802 of 2024 on the file of VII Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai, wherein the application filed by the petitioners / plaintiffs seeking permission to collect the rent of Rs.94,000/- from the tenant of the suit schedule property and deposit the amount before the Court after paying the necessary maintenance charges and taxes, came to be rejected by the Court below.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and carefully perused the materials available on record.
3. The petitioners/plaintiffs have filed the suit seeking for the relief of declaration to declare the Settlement deed executed in favour of the 1st defendant as null and void and not binding on the plaintiff, permanent injunction restraining the 1st defendant from in any manner interfering with the
CRP No. 515 of 2026
peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit properties, permanent injunction restraining the 1st defendant from alienating or encumbering the suit properties and for other consequential reliefs. Pending the suit, the present application came to be filed in IA No.2 of 2024 seeking permission for the 1st petitioner to collect the rents from the tenants and also to utilize the deposit amount after paying the necessary maintenance charges and other expenses. The Court below dismissed the application on the ground that there was a dispute among the family members regarding collection of rents from the suit schedule property and therefore, the inter se rights between the parties cannot be decided in this application. Accordingly, the relief sought for in this application cannot be granted to the plaintiffs. Aggrieved by the same, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed before this Court.
4. In the considered view of this Court, the relief sought for in IA No.2 of 2024 is beyond the scope of the suit. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that already a partition suit has been filed and the same is pending. Therefore, if at all the plaintiffs are claiming any right to collect the rents or receive the amounts deposited, such an application can be moved only before the Court where the suit for partition is pending. In the present case, the Court below is concerned only about the validity or otherwise of the settlement deed dated 06.03.2020 and the cause of action for filing the present suit does not relate to the collection of rents or other deposits. The Court must keep in mind
CRP No. 515 of 2026
that an Interlocutory application cannot be filed under Section 151 of CPC claiming for any relief that goes beyond the scope of the main suit. Section 151 of CPC is not meant for that purpose.
5. In the light of the above discussion, the order passed by the Court below does not warrant the interference of this Court. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 16-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No RKA To The VII Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai
CRP No. 515 of 2026
N.ANAND VENKATESH J. RKA CRP No. 515 of 2026 AND CMP NO. 2758 OF 2026 16-10-2026