Madras High Court
CRP/6141/2026 of Renganathan Vs Renganathan(died) 1)Manivel on 5 October 2026
CRP No. 6141 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
CRP No. 6141 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA012255852026}
AND
CMP NO. 26590 OF 2026
Renganathan
S/o Singaru
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
Renganathan(died)
1. Manivel
S/o Sivasamy,
2. Jayaraman
s/o Sivasamy,
3. Selvam
s/o Sivasamy,
4. Ponnammal
w/o Renganathan,
5. Paari
s/o Renganathan,
6. Balu
s/o Renganathan,
7. Jaya
w/o Anbarasan,
8. Chitra
w/o Pannerselvam,
..Respondent(s)
Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India
CRP No. 6141 of 2026
praying to set aside the fair and decretal order passed in IA No.5/2026 in OS
No.255 of 2013 dated 14.08.2026 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Jayankondam and allow the Civil Revision Petition.
For Petitioner(s):
Ms.S,Vijaya
for M/S.Lane Legal
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 decretal order passed in I.A.No.5 of 2026 in O.S.No.255 of 2013 dated 14.08.2026 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Jayankondam, whereby the application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff to reopen I.A.No.1 of 2021 seeking for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner, came to be dismissed by the Court below.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused the materials available on record as well as the order passed by the Court below.
3. The petitioner is the plaintiff, who filed the suit in O.S.No.255 of 2013 seeking for the relief of specific performance based on the agreement of sale dated 10.10.2011. During the pendency of the suit, IA No.1 of 2021 came to be filed by the petitioner seeking for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner. The said application came to be dismissed on 07.11.2024.
CRP No. 6141 of 2026
Thereafter, the petitioner filed IA No.5 of 2026 seeking to reopen the said application. This application was dismissed by the Court below on the ground that the petitioner had not exhibited due diligence in filing the application at the earliest point of time and that apart, the very purpose of filing an application for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner is not sustainable in the facts and circumstances of the case. Aggrieved by the said order, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed before this Court.
4. In the considered view of this Court, the petitioner / plaintiff has sought for the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to inspect the suit property based on some statement made during cross examination. In the case in hand, there is absolutely no necessity for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner, since the petitioner has to prove the case through oral and documentary evidence. Ultimately, if the petitioner succeeds in the suit, the deed of reconveyance will be executed in favour of the petitioner and whatever is the status of the property will go back to the petitioner. Therefore, to effectively dispose of the suit, there is no requirement for appointing an Advocate Commissioner in this case.
5. In view of the above, the order passed by the Court below does not suffer from any perversity warranting the interference of this Court and accordingly, the same is sustained. This Civil Revision Petition stands
CRP No. 6141 of 2026
N.ANAND VENKATESH J. RKA dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 05-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No RKA To The Principal District Munsif, Jayankondam CRP No. 6141 of 2026 AND CMP NO. 26590 OF 2026