Madras High Court
CRP/5104/2026 of R.Elangovan Vs M.Chinnu on 7 October 2026
CRP No. 5104 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 07-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
CRP No. 5104 of 2026
and CMP No. 22287 of 2026
CNR: {HCMA010459362026}
R.Elangovan
S/o. N.Ranganathan,
no.7A, Natarajan Street,
(Saidai Sambandham Street),
West Saidapet,
Chennai - 600 015.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. M.Chinnu
S/o. Murugesan,
new no.12, old no.15, Officers Colony,
Ayanavaram,
Chennai – 600023.
2. R.Vekatesan
S/o. N.Ranganathan,
no.12, Bangaru Ammal Street,
Mylapore,
Chennai - 600004.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair order and decreetal order passed in IA No.3 of 2025 in OS No 160 of 2020 dated 12.01.2026 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Chengalpattu.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.K.Jayachandran
For Respondent(s):
Mr.Jayaraman for
M/s. Ganesh & Ganesh for R1
R2- Dispensed with
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 06:13:04 pm )
CRP No. 5104 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 has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the fair and decreetal order dated 12.01.2026 passed in IA No.3 of 2025 in OS No 160 of 2020 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Chengalpattu, wherein the petitioner/2nd defendant is aggrieved by the rejection of the petition insofar as Document No.15 is concerned on the ground that the photocopy of the Sale Deed is sought to be marked without laying the foundational facts as to what happened to the original Sale Deed.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 1st respondent and carefully perused the materials available on record and this Court also carefully went through the order passed by the Court below.
3. The 1st respondent is the plaintiff who filed the suit in O.S.No.160 of 2020 seeking for the relief of declaration of title, possession and for other consequential reliefs.
4. The petitioner, who is the 2nd defendant, filed an application under Order VIII Rule 1A of C.P.C., to permit the petitioner to file fifteen documents.
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 06:13:04 pm )
CRP No. 5104 of 2026
The Court below allowed the application insofar as fourteen documents are concerned and the fifteenth document, which is a photocopy of the Sale Deed was rejected on the ground that the petitioner had not laid the foundational facts. Aggrieved by the same, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed before this Court.
5. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the fifteenth document is a Sale Deed dated 17.07.1964, which covers a larger extent and the petitioner is not in possession of the original Sale Deed. It is further submitted that when the certified copy was applied before the Sub Registrar, Joint-II, Saidapet, it was returned stating that the concerned record was completely damaged and therefore, a certified copy cannot be issued.
6. In the considered view of this Court, letting in secondary evidence is permissible where a party is able to lay the foundational facts. The petitioner/2nd defendant has taken a stand that the Sale Deed dated 17.07.1964 pertained to a larger extent and that he never had the original document. Even the certified copy could not be obtained from the Registrar's Office, as the records were completely damaged. In view of the same, the foundational facts has been laid by the petitioner as to why the original Sale Deed is not available. The document can be marked, subject to its relevancy, proof and admissibility, which can be decided by the Court below while dealing with the suit on merits.
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 06:13:04 pm )
CRP No. 5104 of 2026
7. In the result, the order passed by the Court below insofar as the rejecting the application for Document No.15 is concerned, is hereby set aside and this Civil Revision Petition stands allowed in the above terms. No Costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 07-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SSR
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 06:13:04 pm )
CRP No. 5104 of 2026
To The Additional District Judge, Chengalpattu.
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 06:13:04 pm )
CRP No. 5104 of 2026
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J. SSR CRP No. 5104 of 2026 07-10-2026
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 06:13:04 pm )