Madras High Court
CRP(MD)/2803/2026 of VE.Narayanan Chettiar Vs PL.Arunchalam Chettiar on 15 October 2026
CRP(MD) No. 2803 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 15-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE R. POORNIMA
CRP(MD) No. 2803 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011353802026}
1. VE.Narayanan Chettiar,
Trustee of CT. Chidambaram Annadhana Charity, No.48/62, North Adayavalanchan Street, Srirangam, Trichy - 6.
2. Kumarappan Chettiar,
Trustee Of CT. Chidambaram Annadhana
Charity,
No.48/62, North Adayavalanchan Street,
Srirangam,
Trichy - 6.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. PL.Arunchalam Chettiar,
No.48/62, North Adayavalanchan Street,
Srirangam,
Trichy - 6.Tiruchirappalli
2. RM.Palaniappan Chettiar
No.48/62, North Adayavalanchan Street,
Srirangam,
Trichy - 6.
RM. Narayanan Chettiar (Died),
3. R.Annamalai Chettiar,
No.48/62, North Adayavalanchan Street,
Srirangam,
Trichy - 6.
4. N.Venkatachalam Chettiar
No.48/62, North Adayavalanchan Street,
Srirangam,
__________
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 11:23:03 am )
CRP(MD) No. 2803 of 2026
Trichy - 6.
5. AN.Narayanan Chettiar,
No.48/62, North Adayavalanchan Street,
Srirangam,
Trichy - 6.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: J-36. Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of The Constitution of India to set aside the impugned docket order dated 31.08.2026 in Unnumbered I.A.No. of 2026 in O.S.No.287 of 2020 on the file of the Learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Srirangam, consequently direct the Learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Srirangam to number the Interlocutory Application, dispose the same in accordance with law and thus render justice.
For Petitioner(s):
M/s B.Prasanna Vinoth
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 petition is filed against the order dated 31.08.2026 in unnumbered I.A.No…. Of 2026 in O.S.No.287 of 2020 on the file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Srirangam.
2. The petitioners are the plaintiffs in the suit filed seeking a declaration and permanent injunction. The suit was dismissed for default on 14.07.2026, owing to the non-appearance of the plaintiffs. Thereafter, the plaintiffs filed an unnumbered interlocutory application seeking restoration of the suit. The petitioners contended that the first plaintiff __________
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 11:23:03 am )
CRP(MD) No. 2803 of 2026 could not appear before the Court due to sudden illness, while his wife was also unwell and hospitalised. The second plaintiff, Kumarappan Chettiar, was out of station at the relevant time. It was further contended that the restoration petition had been filed within 30 days from the date of dismissal and that the plaintiffs had a reasonable chance of succeeding in the suit if the matter were heard on its merits. The petitioners submitted that, unless the suit was restored, they would suffer irreparable loss and hardship.
3. On perusal of the docket order, it is seen that it was only returned with the following endorsement: “2.khz;g[kpF cah;ePjpkd;w kJiu fpis Crp(M.D)No.731/2026
உத்தரவில்வழக்கின்வாதிகள்மற்றும்
பிரதிவாதிகள்07.07.2026
அன்றுஇந்நீதிமன்றத்தில் நேரில்
ஆஜராகும்படிசொ ல்லப்பட்டுள்ளது.
ஆனால்வாதிகள்தரப்பில்
வாதிகளோ (அ)
அவரதுவழக்கறிஞரோ 07.07.2026 அன்று
அவரதுவழக்கறிஞர்களும்ஆஜராகிஎதிர்வழக்குரையினை
தாக்கல் செய்துள்ளனர்.
மேற்படி07.07.2026
ம்தேதிவாதிநேரில்ஆஜராகாமல்
இருப்பதற்கு தகுந்த ஆவணங்கள் தாக்கல் செய்யவில்லை.
மேலும்தாக்கல்செய்தமருத்துவஆவணங்கள்வாதிகளின்
பெயரில் இல்லை. எனவே ,
மனு திருப்பப்படுகிறது.
காலஅவகாசம்30 நாட்கள் __________
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 11:23:03 am )
CRP(MD) No. 2803 of 2026
4. The trial Court rightly returned the petition, observing that neither the plaintiffs nor their counsel were present when the matter was called. The petition was returned with a direction to re-present the same within 30 days. However, the petitioners failed to re-present the petition within the stipulated period. The petitioners have now sought to proceed as though the petition had been dismissed for default, which is misconceived. Since the petition has only been returned and has not been dismissed for default, the petitioners are at liberty to re-present the same within the time stipulated by the trial Court. Hence, no further orders are required in this petition.
5. With the above observation, the Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. No costs. 15-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No NS __________
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 11:23:03 am )
CRP(MD) No. 2803 of 2026 To
1. The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Srirangam.
2. The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurrai. __________
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 11:23:03 am )
CRP(MD) No. 2803 of 2026 R.POORNIMA, J. NS CRP(MD) No. 2803 of 2026 15-10-2026 __________
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 11:23:03 am )