Madras High Court
CRP(MD)/2543/2026 of Jothi Vs Murugesan on 15 October 2026
CRP(MD) No. 2543 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 15-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE R. POORNIMA
CRP(MD) No. 2543 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011228592026}
AND
CMP(MD) NO. 12673 OF 2026
Jothi
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. Murugesan,
2. Nallammal,
3. Kasthuri,
4. Vasanthi
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: J-36. Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to call for the records and set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 13.07.2026 in I.A.No.01 of 2022 in O.S.No.269 of 2015 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Thuraiyur and allow this Civil Revision petition and thereby render justice.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.H.Lakshmi Shankar
For Respondent(s):
No appearance – for R1, R2, R3 & R4
CRP(MD) No. 2543 of 2026
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 is filed against the order dated 13.07.2026 passed in I.A.No.01 of 2022 in O.S.No.269 of 2015 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Thuraiyur.
2. The petitioner is the plaintiff. The respondents are defendants. The petitioner filed a suit in OS.No.269 of 2025 for the relief of declaration and injunction against the defendants who are the son, wife and daughter of junior paternal uncle of the plaintiff. The respondents/defendants disputed the title of the petitioner by asserting right over half a share in the suit property. Hence, the petitioner/plaintiff issued a pre-legal notice claiming entitlement of the suit property. However, the respondents/defendants claimed that the father of the petitioner/plaintiff executed a Will in their favour and also claimed that the petitioner/plaintiff relinquished her share by receiving a consideration and therefore, they sent a reply by stating that the petitioner has no right to claim ownership of the suit property. Therefore, the petitioner filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction.
3. In the suit, the respondents/defendants appeared and filed their written statement, and contrary to the stand taken in the reply notice,
CRP(MD) No. 2543 of 2026 now, they claimed that they had been in possession of the suit property by way of adverse possession, to the knowledge of the original owner.
4. The petitioner admits that though the respondents filed the written statement on 05.01.2016, it was only subsequently, after the commencement of trial that she discussed the matter with the advocate and found that she should file a reply statement denying the new plea of adverse possession claimed by the defendants in their written statement and thus, the petitioner sought permission to file a reply statement and the same was dismissed by the trial Court by holding that the petitioner has already denied the contention of the respondents in her plaint itself. Against which the present civil revision petition is filed.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.
6. In this case, the respondents/defendants filed a counter only disputing the allegation, that after filing their written statement, the trial Court has framed issues and the suit was posted for trial and at this stage, the petitioner filed the petition belatedly. But the trial Court has stated that the petitioner had already disputed the same in her plaint.
CRP(MD) No. 2543 of 2026
7. On verification of the written statement, at present the respondents claimed adverse possession, for which the petitioner wants to file an additional reply statement only with regard to the adverse possession. Therefore, the petitioner is permitted to file a reply statement with regard to the claim of adverse possession raised by the defendants. Hence, the order of the trial Court is liable to be set aside.
8. In view of the above, this civil revision petition is allowed. The order dated 13.07.2026 passed in I.A.No.01 of 2022 in O.S.No.269 of 2015 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Thuraiyur is hereby set aside. The petitioner is permitted to file reply statement with regard to the claim of adverse possession raised by the defendants. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 15-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No RM Copy to The District Munsif Court, Thuraiyur
CRP(MD) No. 2543 of 2026 R.POORNIMA J. RM CRP(MD) No. 2543 of 2026 AND CMP(MD) NO. 12673 OF 2026 15-10-2026