Madras High Court
CRP(MD)/2725/2026 of Mohammed Ali Vs K.Ganesan on 12 October 2026
CRP(MD) No. 2725 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 12-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE R. POORNIMA
CRP(MD) No. 2725 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011408092026}
AND
CMP(MD) No. 14036 of 2026
1. Mohammed Ali
2. Mohammed Ismail
..Petitioner(s)
Vs.
K.Ganesan
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: J-36. Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to call for the records relating to fair order and decretal order dated 20.08.2026 passed in I.A.No.6 of 2026 in O.S.No.40
of 2026 on the file of the District Munsif, Thirumayam (Honourable District Munsif, Pudukkottai-Incharge) and set aside the same by allowing this Civil Revision Petition as prayed for.
For Petitioner(s)
: M/s. S.Balasubramanian
For Respondent(s)
: Mr.G.Mathavan
__________
( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 02:23:51 pm )
CRP(MD) No. 2725 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 passed in IA.No.6 of 2026 in O.S.No.40 of 2026 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Thirumayam.
2. The petitioners are the defendants/landlords. The respondent is the plaintiff/tenant. The respondent /plaintiff filed a suit for the relief of permanent injunction against the petitioners/defendant not to evict him.
3. It is the contention of the respondent/plaintiff that the petitioners closed the shop on 19.02.2026 with additional locks and the plaintiff came to know about the same 20.02.2026 and therefore, he immediately within a month filed the suit on 16.03.2026. The respondent/plaintiff also lodged a complaint before the Town Police Station, Pudukottai and also filed WP.Crl.(MD)No.1334 of 2026 to take action against the illegal action of the petitioners. Since the petitioners claimed that the respondent is an encroacher, the writ petition was closed with liberty to approach the appropriate authority. In the meantime, the respondent/plaintiff filed IA.No.6 of 2026 on 19.06.2026 claiming that a Commissioner has to be appointed to take inventory of the gold __________
( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 02:23:51 pm )
CRP(MD) No. 2725 of 2026 ornaments, silver ornaments and other ledgers which were alleged to be kept in the suit premises. The trial Court allowed the petition. Against which the present civil revision petition is filed.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners stated that already a commissioner has been appointed and he took inventory and filed his report before the trial Court and the petitioners have also filed their objection. Therefore, the prayer sought for in this petition has become infructuous.
5. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners should be given an opportunity to cross examine the Commissioner and to file appropriate petition before the Court.
6. In view of the above, this civil revision petition is closed. The petitioners are at liberty to cross examine the commissioner and to file appropriate petition before the Court in accordance with law. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 12-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No RM __________
( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 02:23:51 pm )
CRP(MD) No. 2725 of 2026 To The District Munsif Court, Thirumayam. __________
( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 02:23:51 pm )
CRP(MD) No. 2725 of 2026 R.POORNIMA, J. rm CRP(MD) No. 2725 of 2026 AND CMP(MD) No. 14036 of 2026 12-10-2026 __________
( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 02:23:51 pm )