Madras High Court
REV.APPL/207/2026 of Amudha Vs Saraswathi on 23 September 2026
REV.APPL No. 207 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23-09-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI
REV.APPL No. 207 of 2026
and CMP. No.24061 of 2026
CNR: {HCMA011635522026}
1. Amudha
W/o. late. Perumal,
Thattanchavadipallam,
Near Kaliamman Koil,
Kollapatti, Karuppur Post,
Omalur Taluk, Salem.
2. Lavanya
W/o. Manikandan,
Mettupatti,
Kullappanaickenpatty Village,
Omalur Taluk, Salem.
3. Tamilselvan
S/o. late Perumal,
Thattanchavadipallam,
Near Kaliamman Koil,
Kollapatti, Karuppur Post,
Omalur Taluk, Salem.
4. Ishwarya
W/o. Ajithkumar,
Manjaiyankadu,
Vattakadu Post,
Omalur Taluk, Salem.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
Saraswathi
W/o. Sivakumar,
Kuduvampatti,
Thathaiyangarapatti,
Omalur Taluk,
Salem
Narayanan (died)
..Respondent(s)
REV.APPL No. 207 of 2026
PRAYER: This Review Application is filed under Order XLVII, Rules 1 and 2
CPC, read with Section 114 of CPC, to review the order passed in CRP.No.5397 of 2025 dated 23.02.2026.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.A.K.Sriram,
Senior Counsel for
Mr. P.K.Harinath Babu
For Respondent(s):
Mr.T.S.Vijayaraghavan
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
Heard Mr.A.K.Sriram, learned Senior Counsel for Mr.P.K.Harinath Babu, learned counsel for the Review Applicants and Mr.T.S.Vijayaraghavan, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. The short ground on which, the review of my order dated 23.02.2026 in CRP. No.5397 of 2025, sought for is that though I had agreed with the directions issued by this Court in CRP. (NPD) No.1404 of 2022, dated 21.04.2022, while passing orders, I had restricted the direction only to one portion of the order passed in CRP. (NPD) No.1404 of 2022, dated 21.04.2022, omitting another substantial direction that had been issued by my predecessor Judge, while disposing of CRP. (NPD) No.1404 of 2022. The learned Senior Counsel would therefore pray for a suitable direction, especially since the Executing Court is interpreting the order of this Court for holding an enquiry, without calling upon the parties to lead oral and documentary evidence, which is absolutely necessary to give a quietus to the lis.
REV.APPL No. 207 of 2026
3. Per contra, Mr.T.S.Vijayaraghavan, learned counsel for the respondent pointing out to the grounds of Review would state that the grounds of attack are against the reasoning made by the Executing Court and not by this Court and all these grounds have already been addressed in the order dated 22.03.2026. He would therefore state that there is no error apparent on the face of the record warranting review power to be exercised under Order 47, Rules 1 and 2 CPC.
4. I have carefully considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel on either side.
5. Firstly, it is to be noted that I was in respectful agreement with the order in CRP. (NPD) No.1404 of 2022, dated 21.04.2022, and at Paragraph No. 7, I have clearly stated that the matter has to be remitted to the Executing Court, in order to comply with the directions issued in CRP. (NPD) No.1404 of 2022. Thus it clearly implies that the two directions that were contemplated in CRP. (NPD) No.1404 of 2022, dated 21.04.2022, have to be necessarily complied with by the Executing Court. Merely because, I have not specifically culled out one of the scenarios in the subsequent portion of the order, it does not disentitle the petitioner to avail the earlier liberty that was given in CRP. (NPD) No.1404 of 2022.
REV.APPL No. 207 of 2026
6. However, as rightly pointed by the learned counsel for the respondent Mr.T.S.Vijayaraghavan, I do not find any ground arising for reviewing the order dated 23.02.2026. At the same time, it is clarified that since the revision was allowed, with a direction to the Executing Court to comply with the directions issued in CRP. (NPD) No.1404 of 2022, dated 21.04.2022, all the aspects which the Executing Court was called upon to enquire are to be necessarily addressed by the Executing Court, for which purpose the Executing Court shall afford a fair opportunity to both parties to lead oral and documentary evidence. The said process should be concluded after hearing the arguments, post recording evidence and the Executing Court shall decide the entitlement of the revision petitioners, in line with the directions issued in CRP. (NPD) No.1404 of 2022. The exercise shall be completed within a period of four (4) months from the date of receipt of the copy of the orders.
7. This Review Application is dismissed with the above terms. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also closed. No costs. 23-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No RKP
REV.APPL No. 207 of 2026
P.B.BALAJI, J. RKP REV.APPL No. 207 of 2026 and CMP. No.24061 of 2026 23-09-2026