Madras High Court
CRP/6765/2026 of George Anthony Ikechukwu Vs Vijaya Hospital on 27 October 2026
CRP No. 6765 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
CRP No. 6765 of 2026
and CMP No. 29136 of 2026
CNR: {HCMA012123372026}
George Anthony Ikechukwu
s/o. Mr. George Ikechukwu
No. 1/10, Kanammal Street,
Kannabiran Colony,
Saligrammam,
Chennai - 600093
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
Vijaya Hospital
Vijaya Medical and Educational Trust
Rep by its Chief Medical Officer
No.323, N.S.K.Salai,
Vadapalani. Chennai - 6000026
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to stay the operation and set aside the order passed by the XVIII Assistant City Civil Court at Chennai dated 15.07.2026 in IA No.1 of 2026 in OS
No.5626 of 2025 pending disposal
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.Ajay Francis Inigo Loyola
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 15.07.2026 passed in IA No.1 of 2026 in OS No.5626 of 2025 on the file of the XVIII Assistant City Civil Court at Chennai, wherein the application filed by the
CRP No. 6765 of 2026
petitioner/plaintiff under Order XXVI Rule 10A of C.P.C., for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to send the disputed signatures for comparison along with admitted signatures came to be rejected by the Court below.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused the materials available on record and this Court also carefully went through the order passed by the Court below.
3. The petitioner is the plaintiff who has filed the suit in O.S.No.5626 of 2025 seeking for the relief of declaration to declare the disputed signatures in the documents as null and void and for damages. Before the issues were framed, the present application was filed for comparing the disputed documents received through Right to Information Act along with the admitted signatures. This application came to be dismissed by the Court below and aggrieved by the same, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed before this Court.
4. The specific case of the petitioner is that the original of the disputed document is available with the respondent/defendant and that an application has already been filed seeking a direction to the respondent/defendant to produce the original before the Court. If that is so, the Court below has to deal with the said application. If, ultimately, the original document containing the allegedly disputed signature is produced before the Court, the disputed signature can
CRP No. 6765 of 2026
thereafter be compared with the admitted signatures. The present application is premature, since the petitioner wants the signature found in the document obtained through RTI through compared with the admitted signatures.
5. The Court below, after dealing with the application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff and on the original documents being furnished before the Court, can proceed further with the same in line with the judgment of the Apex Court in Gopal Pathak vs. Nitin Alias Pappu and Another made in Civil Appeal No.13004 of 2026, dated 18.09.2026. This observation will sufficiently take care of the interests of the petitioner.
6. In the result, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of in the above terms. No Costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 27-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SSR To The XVIII Assistant City Civil Court at Chennai.
CRP No. 6765 of 2026
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J. SSR CRP No. 6765 of 2026 27-10-2026