Madras High Court
CRP/5928/2026 of S.Manimaran Vs Hallmark Infrastructure Private Limited on 26 October 2026
CRP No. 5928 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 26-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SOUNTHAR
CRP No. 5928 of 2026
CNR: {HCMA011733992026}
1. S.Manimaran
Proprietor,
doing business in the trade name,
Inovo Interior Decors,
Through his power agent S.Alashias
(2nd Plaintiff herein)
Residing at No.1/10,
Periyapanichery, Kundrathur Main Road,
Porur, Chennai 600 128.
2. S.Alashias, S/o. K.Shanmugam,
Currently residing at F2-Vishwa Castle,
No.5, Manohar Nagar Extension,
IIT Colony 3rd Cross Street,
Pallikaranai, Chennai 600 100.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. Hallmark Infrastructure Private Limited Rep by its Director, Registered Office at Suite A, No.43, Old No.62/2, United pLaza, Usman Road, T.Nagar, Chennai 600 017.
2. Hallmark Capital Private Limited
Rep by its Director,
Registered Office at Suite A,
No.43, Old No.62/2, United pLaza,
Usman Road, T.Nagar, Chennai 600 017.
3. U.Hemalatha, W/o. Umabathi,
No.1/37, Ramasamy Street,
Gerugampakkam, Kancheepuram 600 122.
CRP No. 5928 of 2026
4. Venugopal, S/o. Manogaran,
No.208, Mettu Street,
Kolappalaur, Tiruvannamalai,
Vandavasi 632 313.
..Respondent(s)
Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the order dated 01.06.2026 passed in COS(SR) No.9 of 2025
on the file of the Principal Commercial Court, Egmore, and direct the said Court to register the plaint as Commercial Original Suit.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.N.Sivakumar
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 challenging the order passed by the Trial Court, rejecting the plaint filed by the petitioner as barred by limitation.
2. The Registry has raised objection with regard to the maintainability of this civil revision petition, as the order impugned herein is deemed to be a decree.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners made an endorsement that the impugned order, rejecting the plaint, has been passed without hearing the counsel for the petitioners. Since the principles of natural justice has been
CRP No. 5928 of 2026 violated, according to the counsel, the petitioners are entitled to invoke the supervisory jurisdiction of this court.
4. A perusal of the certified copy of the impugned order would indicate that the order has been passed by the Trial Court, after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, namely. Mr.N.Sivakumar and P.Sumathi. The preamble portion of the impugned order reflects the presence of the counsel for the petitioners on the date of hearing. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the impugned order has been passed by the Trial Court, without hearing the counsel for the petitioners, however, in the certified copy of the order, it was wrongly mentioned, as if the counsel for the petitioners were heard.
4. The recording made by the Court is deemed to be correct. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the impugned order on the ground that it was passed without hearing the counsel for the petitioners and the recording made in the impugned order as if the counsel for the petitioners were heard, is not correct, it is for them to approach the very same court by filing appropriate application, while the matter is still fresh in the memory of the court. The petitioners are not entitled to approach the superior forum and complain that the recording made by the Trial Court is not correct. Therefore, this court is not inclined to entertain this civil revision petition.
CRP No. 5928 of 2026
5. Accordingly, this civil revision petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Liberty is granted to the petitioners either to approach the Trial Court with appropriate application, or to avail appeal remedy before the regular first appellate court, challenging the impugned order on merits. 26-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No MST To The Principal Commercial Court, Egmore.
CRP No. 5928 of 2026 S.SOUNTHAR, J. MST CRP No. 5928 of 2026 26-10-2026