Madras High Court
CRP/1155/2023 of Vanitha Vs Thirunavukarasu on 12 October 2026
CRP No. 1155 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
CRP No. 1155 of 2023
and CMP No. 8033 of 2023
CNR: {HCMA010641822023}
1. Vanitha
W/o. Panneerselvam, Middle Street, North Poigainallur-611 106, Nagapattinam District, Taluk and Munsif.
2. Baskar
S/o. Kuppusamy, Middle Street, North
Poigainallur-611 106, Nagapattinam District, Taluk and Munsifi.
3. Venkatesan
S/o. Veerasamy, Middle Street, North
Poigainallur-611 106, Nagapattinam District, Taluk and Munsifi.
4. Sudhakar
S/o. Veerasamy, Middle Street, North
Poigainallur-611 106,
Nagapattinam District, Taluk and Munsifi.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. Thirunavukarasu
S/o. Krishnan, No.4/167, Middle Street, North Poigainallur-611 106, Nagapattinam District, Taluk and Munsifi.
2. Senthamilselvan
S/o. Krishnan, No.4/167, Middle Street, North Poigainallur-611 106, Nagapattinam District, Taluk and Munsifi.
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 07:38:59 pm )
CRP No. 1155 of 2023
3. District Collector
Nagapattinam District, District Collectorate, Nagapattinam-611 001.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the Fair Order and Decreetal Order dated 21.12.2022 passed in Review Petition in IA No.3 of 2022 in POP No.40 of 2020 on the file of the Principal District Court, Nagapattinam.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.T.A.Shagul Hameed
For Respondent(s):
Mr.T.Ananthasekar for R1 and R2
Mrs.S.Yogalakshmi
Additional Government Pleader for R3
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 Review Petition in IA No.3 of 2022 in POP No.40 of 2020 on the file of the Principal District Court, Nagapattinam, dated 21.12.2022, wherein the Principal District Court, Nagapattinam, allowed the Review Petition and permitted the plaintiff to sue as an indigent person.
2. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the 1st petitioner and the 3rd petitioner died during the pendency of the Civil Revision Petition and hence, some time is required to implead the legal representatives of the 1st and 3rd petitioners.
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 07:38:59 pm )
CRP No. 1155 of 2023
3. In the considered view of this Court, the 1st and 2nd petitioners represented one branch and the 3rd and 4th petitioners represented the other branch. Therefore, even though the 1st petitioner died, the 2nd petitioner can sufficiently take care of that branch. Similarly, even though the 3rd petitioner has died, the 4th petitioner will sufficiently take care of the other branch. Therefore, considering the nature of relief sought for in the present suit, it is not necessary to implead the legal representatives of the 1st and 3rd petitioners.
4. In the case in hand, the respondents/plaintiffs filed the suit seeking for the relief of recovery of possession. POP No.40 of 2020 was filed seeking for the leave to file as an indigent person. This petition came to be rejected on 18.07.2022. Thereafter, Review Petition in I.A.No.3 of 2022 was filed to review the earlier order and this application was allowed. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners/defendants have approached this Court.
5. In the considered of this Court, the issue regarding Court fees is a matter between the Court and the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs wanted to file the suit as indigent person. Initially, the Court rejected the same and subsequently, found that there was an error apparent on the face of the order passed in POP No.40 of 2020 and accordingly, the order was reviewed and the plaintiffs were permitted to prosecute the suit as indigent persons.
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 07:38:59 pm )
CRP No. 1155 of 2023
6. The order passed by the Court below does not suffer from any perversity and that apart, the petitioners/defendants cannot have any grievance if the plaintiffs are permitted to prosecute the suit as indigent person. Ultimately, the suit has to be contested on merits and for the last six years, the effective hearing of the suit has not even commenced.
7. In view of the above, the order passed by the Court below is sustained. It is left open to the petitioners to raise all the grounds before the Court below in the main suit and the same will be considered on its own merits and in accordance with law. There shall be a direction to the plaintiffs to take steps to implead the legal representatives of the deceased 2nd and 4th defendants in the suit, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If no effective steps are taken by the plaintiffs, the Court below shall pass consequential orders.
9. In the result, this Civil Revision Petition stands disposed of in the above terms. No Costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 12-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SSR
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 07:38:59 pm )
CRP No. 1155 of 2023
To
1. The Principal District Court, Nagapattinam.
2. The District Collector Nagapattinam District, District Collectorate, Nagapattinam-611 001.
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 07:38:59 pm )
CRP No. 1155 of 2023
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J. SSR CRP No. 1155 of 2023 12-10-2026
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 07:38:59 pm )