Madras High Court
CRP/1275/2024 of MUNUSAMY (DIED) Vs CHIDAMBARAM on 14 October 2026
CRP No. 1275 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14-10-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
CRP No. 1275 of 2024
and CMP No.6723 of 2024
CNR:{HCMA010476012024}
Munusamy (died)
1. Irusappan
2. Manikkam
3. Dhanalakshmi
4. Sampoornam
5. Irusammal
6. Vajjravelu
7. Mani
8. Gurusamy
9. Ellammal
10. Susila
11. Perumal
12. Arputhammal
13. Anandhan
14. Parameswari
15. Ambiga
Petitioner(s)
( Uploaded on: 27/10/2026 02:36:17 pm )
CRP No. 1275 of 2024
Vs
1. Chidambaram
2.Chanderan
Respondent(s)
PRAYER
Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the order dated 11.1.2024 made in IA.No.1/2023 in OS.No. 19/2017 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Tiruttani to direct the SRO, Tiruttani to produce the original signatures available within their file with regard to the above said sale deed dated 2.3.2001 registered as document No.434/2001 particularly the finger index bookk for the said document to the forensic department.
For Petitioner(s):
Ms.Pavithrashini
For Respondent(s):
Mr. Adeesh Anto
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 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the fair and decreetal order passed in IA.No.1/2023 in OS.No. 19/2017, dated 11.01.2024, on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Tiruttani, wherein the application filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs to issue witness summons to the Sub Registrar, Tiruttani to produce the certified copy of the sale deed dated 02.3.2001, finger print index book for Document No.434/2001 and the records pertaining to the payment of stamp duty and deficit stamp duty, came to be rejected by the Court below.
( Uploaded on: 27/10/2026 02:36:17 pm )
CRP No. 1275 of 2024
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for respondents.
3. This Court carefully considered the submissions made on either side and the materials available on record. This Court also went through the order passed by the Court below.
4. The petitioners are the plaintiffs who filed the suit in OS.No.19 of 20017 seeking for the relief of partition and for allotment of 2/3rd share in the suit property and to declare the sale deed dated 02.3.2001 as null and void and not binding on the plaintiffs.
5. IA.No.1 of 2023 came to be filed before the Court below for issuing summons to the Sub Registrar, Tiruttani, to produce certain documents on the ground that the sale deed itself is a forged document and there was also deficit stamp duty paid initially and the relevant records must be produced before the Court in order to enable the plaintiffs to prove that the alleged sale deed is a fabricated document.
6. The Court below dismissed the application mainly on the ground that the plaintiffs were taking different stands at different points of time and were
( Uploaded on: 27/10/2026 02:36:17 pm )
CRP No. 1275 of 2024 blowing hot and cold. In view of the inconsistent stand taken by the plaintiffs, the Court below was not inclined to accede to the relief sought for by the plaintiffs and accordingly dismissed the application.
7. The order passed by the Court below does not suffer from any perversity warranting the interference of this Court. As rightly held by the Court below, the plaintiffs are blowing hot and cold and are taking contradicting stand in the suit. Initially plaintiffs took a stand that the sale deed is a fraudulent document since it will not bind the plaintiffs. Subsequently, the plaintiffs takes a stand that the document is a forgery.
8. In the light of the above discussion, the order passed by the Court below does not suffer from any perversity warranting the interference of this Court and accordingly, this CRP is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 14-10-2026 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No kp
( Uploaded on: 27/10/2026 02:36:17 pm )
CRP No. 1275 of 2024 To The Subordinate Judge, Tiruttani
( Uploaded on: 27/10/2026 02:36:17 pm )
CRP No. 1275 of 2024 N.ANAND VENKATESH J. kp CRP No. 1275 of 2024
14-10-2026
( Uploaded on: 27/10/2026 02:36:17 pm )