Madras High Court
CRP/6345/2026 of Krishnaveni Vs K.K.Babu on 7 October 2026
CRP No. 6345 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. 6345 of 2026
and CMP No. 27355 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA011653102026}
1. Krishnaveni
W/o. Late Kalyanram,
2. Yasodha
W/o. Late Rajkumar
3. Karthikkalyan
S/o. Late Rajkumar
..Petitioners
Vs
1. K.K.Babu
D/o. Late Kalyanram,
2. Latha
D/o. Late Kalyanram,
..Respondents
Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to set aside the Fair and Decretal order made in IA No.7 of 2026
in O.S. No.391 of 2023 on the file of Principal District Judge, Krishnagiri dated 24.02.2026 and thus render justice.
For Petitioners :
Mr.C.Veera Raghavan
CRP No. 6345 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 against the fair and decreetal order dated 24.02.2026 made in I.A.No.7 of 2026 in O.S.No.391 of 2023 on the file of Principal District Judge, Krishnagiri, wherein the Court below, which permitted the petitioners/defendants to take temporary custody of the original documents, by imposing a condition that the said documents will be returned back within the time stipulated, ultimately dismissed the application on the ground that the original documents were not returned back to the Court within the time specified by the Court below.
2. Heard Mr.C.Veera Raghavan, learned counsel for the petitioners and carefully perused the material available on record. This Court also went through the impugned order.
3. The respondents are the plaintiffs, who filed the suit in O.S.No.391 of 2023 seeking for the relief of partition and for allotment of ¼ th share in the suit property and for other consequential reliefs. The suit reached the stage of trial and certain original documents were marked on the side of the defendants as Exs.B3, B5 and B7.
CRP No. 6345 of 2026
4. The petitioners filed I.A.No.7 of 2026 in O.S.No.391 of 2023 before the Court below with a request to return back the original documents marked as Exs.B3, B5 and B7 on the ground that they require the documents for renewal of their theatre license, 'C' - form.
5. The application was allowed by the Court below by order dated 09.02.2026 on condition that the original documents must be returned back to the Court on or before 24.02.2026.
6. Pursuant to the above order, the original documents were handed over to the defendants and they also submitted the same before the concerned authorities. However, the concerned authorities did not return back the documents and as a result, the petitioners were not able to comply with the condition imposed by the Court below to the effect that the original documents must be returned back on or before 24.02.2026.
7. The petitioners filed an interlocutory application seeking for extension of time to return back the original documents. This application was not numbered and it was returned on the ground that the application has already been disposed of.
CRP No. 6345 of 2026
8. The respondents, who are the plaintiffs, filed applications before the Court below in I.A.No.8 of 2026 in O.S.No.391 of 2023 seeking for an order of interim injunction and I.A.No.9 of 2026 in O.S.No.392 of 2023 to draw adverse inference against the defendants for not complying with the order passed by the Court below. Apart from that, the respondents were also preventing the petitioners from getting renewal of the license. It is under these circumstances, the present Civil Revision Petition came to be filed before this Court.
8. In the considered view of this Court, the fact remains that the original documents were marked on the side of the defendants as Ex.B3, B5 and B7. The defendants sought for proper permission from the Court below to get the original documents in order to submit the same before the authorities. Such a permission was also granted by the Court below. The issue of renewal of license is pending before the authorities since it is opposed by the respondents. Therefore, the time within which the authorities will decide the issue regarding the renewal of license is not within the control of the petitioners. Hence, there is no malafide intention on the part of the petitioners in not complying with the order passed by the Court below and the petitioners are genuinely having a problem in getting back the original documents since the renewal of license is pending before the authorities. This fact should have been appreciated by the Court below, instead, the Court below proceeded to dismiss the application only on the ground that the condition has not been complied with.
CRP No. 6345 of 2026
9. It is made clear that as and when the process of renewal of license is completed by the authorities and the original documents are returned back to the petitioners, the petitioners shall in turn file the same before the Court below and the Court below need not take adverse inference against the petitioners on this ground. It is also made clear that the petitioners will take effective steps to get the process of renewal of license completed at the earliest. This Civil Revision Petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 07-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No mp To
1. The Principal District Judge, Krishnagiri.
2. V.R.Section, High Court of Madras.
CRP No. 6345 of 2026
N.ANAND VENKATESH J. mp CRP No. 6345 of 2026 07-10-2026