CRP/4336/2025 of DEVAKI Vs RADHA
CRP No. 4336 of 2025
__________
Page1 of 5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09-04-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
CRP No. 4336 of 2025
AND
CMP No. 22268 OF 2025 & CMP NO. 1482 OF 2026
1. Devaki
W/o.Manickam,
No.3 Kumarakottam Street, Nellikuppam,
Panruti Tk., Cuddalore Dist.
2. Ravikumar
S/o.Manickam,
No.3 Kumarakottam Street, Nellikuppam,
Panruti Tk., Cuddalore Dist.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. Radha
D/o.Krishnan,
No.3 Kumarakottam Street, Nellikuppam,
Panruti Tk., Cuddalore Dist.
2. Gomathi
W/o.Jayachandran,
No.3 Kumarakottam Street, Nellikuppam,
Panruti Tk., Cuddalore Dist.
3. Gunasundari
W/o.Subbiah,
No.8 Anna Nagar East,
(Backside of Housing Board),
Pondicherry.
4. Valli
W/o.Suruli @ Jayachandran, Veli
Semmandalam, Cuddalore - 607 001.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP No. 4336 of 2025
__________
Page2 of 5
5. Mohanasundari
D/o.Manickam,
No.3 Kumarakottam Street, Nellikuppam,
Panruti Tk., cuddalore Dist.
6. Mangalam
W/o.Pasupathy,
No.28 New Housing Unit, B Block, Thanjavur.
7. Rajalakshmi
W/o.Sivan Krishnasamy,
No.2/1, Muthamiz Nagar, Nellithoppu,
Puducherry.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution
of India, to set aside the docket order dated 13-08-2025 passed in IA.No.498 of
2025 in OS No.85 of 2005 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Panruti.
For Petitioner(s): Mr.D.Baskar
For Respondent(s): Mr. B. Devakumar For R1 To R5
Mr.J.Arul Sharma For R6
R7 - Left India
ORDER
Challenging the impugned order passed in IA No.498 of 2025 in OS
No.85 of 2005 dated 13.08.2025 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Panruti,
the plaintiffs have preferred this revision petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP No. 4336 of 2025
__________
Page3 of 5
2. The plaintiffs filed an application before the trial court se eking
permission of the court to examine one Yasothai, who is the sister of t he first
plaintiff and first defendant. The trial court dismissed the applicat ion by stating
that the case was pending for nearly about 20 years and after comple tion of the
evidence, they come forward with such application, which cannot be entertained
without any justifiable reason. Aggrieved over the same, the plaintiffs have
preferred this revision petition.
3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioners submits that the
proposed witness is the sister of both plaintiff and the defendant and she know
the family affairs, therefore he wants to examine her, but the court has not given
such opportunity.
4. The learned counsel for the respondents raised strong objections stating
that the case is pending from the year 2005 and there is no pleading a bout this
witness in the plaint, without which they are not entitled to examine the witness.
5. Considering both the submissions, the fact reveals that the suit was
filed in the year 2005 between the plaintiffs and the defendants w ith regard to
the prayer of declaration. Admittedly, the first plaintiff and the first defendant,
who are sisters, claim themselves as wife of Manickam, which i s under dispute.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP No. 4336 of 2025
__________
Page4 of 5
Both side adduced evidence and the evidence was closed. At that time, on the
side of the plaintiffs, they have come forward with one application to examine
Yasothai, who is the sister of Manickam . On seeing the entire plaint averments,
there is no mention about the said Yasothai. No pleading was found in the plaint
also. Now after completion of the evidence, without assigning any reason the
plaintiffs pray to examine such witness which is not entertainable . To that
effect, the order passed by the trial judge requires no interferenc e. Therefore,
this civil revision petition is dismissed. The trial judge is direct ed to dispose of
the case within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, the connected Civil Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
09-04-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
MTL
To
1. The Subordinate Court, Panruti.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP No. 4336 of 2025
__________
Page5 of 5
T.V.THAMILSELVI J.
MTL
CRP No. 4336 of 2025
AND CMP No. 22268 OF 2025
& CMP NO. 1482 OF 2026
09-04-2026
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis