Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Haja Bakrudeen Vs Sirajudeen — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

Home
Madras HC
2025
Haja Bakrudeen Vs SirajudeenHaja Bakrudeen v. Sirajudeen

Dismissed¶27

Haja Bakrudeen v. Sirajudeen

Madras HC11 Dec 2025CRP/6231/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court; CRP Nos.6231 & 6282 of 2025; CMP No.31164 of 2025; Article 227 Constitution of India; P.B. Balaji J.; order dated 11-12-2025; revisions against orders dated 22.09.2025 in EA No.8/2025 and EA No.9/2025 in EA No.6/2023 in EP No.20/2021 in OS No.232/2011, District Munsif Court, Nagapattinam; petitioner Haja Bakrudeen; respondents Sirajudeen (caveator) and Nagore Dargha Trust; decree holder took possession after filing; nothing survived; revisions dismissed; no costs; connected miscellaneous petition closed; petitioner reserved right to challenge factum of possession in independent proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Since the respondent/decree holder has taken possession of the subject property after filing of the revisions and nothing survives for consideration therein (as confirmed by counsel for the first respondent/caveator), the Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed.

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the orders and decreetal orders dated 22.09.2025 in E.A. Nos.8 and 9 of 2025 (in E.A. No.6 of 2023 in E.P. No.20 of 2021 in O.S. No.232 of 2011, District Munsif Court, Nagapattinam) should be set aside and the 2nd respondent Trust directed to let in evidence on behalf of the petitioner side. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Since the respondent/decree holder has taken possession of the subject property after filing of the revisions and nothing survives for consideration therein (as confirmed by counsel for the first respondent/caveator), the Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed.

Key takeaways

No costs were imposed and the connected Miscellaneous Petition (CMP No.31164 of 2025) stands closed along with the dismissed revisions.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (P.B. Balaji J., 11-12-2025) dismissed two civil revision petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution (CRP Nos.6231 & 6282 of 2025, heard together by common order with connected CMP No.31164 of 2025). The petitioner, Haja Bakrudeen, sought to set aside the orders and decreetal orders dated 22.09.2025 of the District Munsif Court, Nagapattinam in E.A. Nos.8 & 9 of 2025 in E.A. No.6 of 2023 in E.P. No.20 of 2021 in O.S. No.232 of 2011, and to direct the 2nd respondent (Nagore Dargha Trust) to let in petitioner-side evidence alleged to have been unconsidered by the executing court. During hearing, petitioner's counsel reported that the respondent/decree holder had meanwhile taken possession of the subject property, the petitioner reserving the right to contest the factum of possession in independent proceedings; this was confirmed by counsel for the first respondent/caveator. Holding that nothing survived for consideration, the court dismissed both revisions without costs and closed the connected miscellaneous petition.

A

CRP Nos.6231 & 6282 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 11-12-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI

CRP Nos.6231 & 6282 of 2025 and CMP No.31164 of 2025

Haja Bakrudeen S/o.Manjur Shah Maraikayar, No.39, Nagore Kalpagdaga Salai, Nagapattinam Taluk, Nagapattinam District.

Petitioner in both petitions

Vs

Sirajudeen S/o.Meera Hussain, No.7, Mohideen School Road, 11th Lane, Nagapattinam Taluk, Nagapattinam District.

2.Nagore Dargha Rep. by its Managing Trustee, Nagapattinam Taluk, Nagapattinam District.

Respondents in both petitions

PRAYER in C.R.P.No.6231 of 2025: Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the order and decreetal order passed in EA No.9/2025 in EA No.6/2023 in EP No.20/2021 in OS No.232/2011 on the file of District Munsif Court, Nagapattinam dated 22.09.2025 therefore to direct the 2nd respondent Trust to let in evidence on behalf of the petitioner side evidence, which has not been considered by the executing court and thus render justice.

1

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

CRP Nos.6231 & 6282 of 2025

PRAYER in CRP No. 6282 of 2025: Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the order and decreetal order passed in EA.No.8/2025 in EA.No.6 of 2023 in EP.No.20 of 2021 in OS.No.232 of 2011 on the file of the District Munisf Court, Nagapatnam dated 22.09.2025 therefore to direct the 2nd Respondent trust to let in evidence on behalf of the petitioner side evidence, which has not been considered by the executing court and thus render justice.

Appearance of counsel in both C.R.P’s

For Petitioner(s): Ms.S.Aswin Karthikeyan For Respondents: Mr.V. Raghupathi

COMMON ORDER

Since the issue involved and the relief sought in these two Civil Revision Petitions are identical in nature, the same were heard together and decided of vide this common order.

The learned counsel for the petitioner fairly brings to my notice that after filing of the above revisions, the respondent/decree holder has taken possession of the subject property, though he reserves his right to challenge the factum of possession being taken in independent proceedings.

2

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

CRP Nos.6231 & 6282 of 2025

Recording the same and noting that nothing survives for consideration

in the revisions, the factum of which is also confirmed by the learned counsel for the first respondent/caveator, these Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed.

No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

11-12-2025

Jd Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No

To The District Munisf Court, Nagapatnam.

3

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

CRP Nos.6231 & 6282 of 2025

P.B.BALAJI J. jd

CRP Nos.6231 & 6282 of 2025

11-12-2025

4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Issues for consideration

2 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the orders and decreetal orders dated 22.09.2025 in E.A. Nos.8 and 9 of 2025 (in E.A. No.6 of 2023 in E.P. No.20 of 2021 in O.S. No.232 of 2011, District Munsif Court, Nagapattinam) should be set aside and the 2nd respondent Trust directed to let in evidence on behalf of the petitioner side.¶13
2.
Whether anything survived for consideration in the Civil Revision Petitions after the respondent/decree holder took possession of the subject property subsequent to their filing.medium confidence¶26
The court held
Since the respondent/decree holder has taken possession of the subject property after filing of the revisions and nothing survives for consideration therein (as confirmed by counsel for the first respondent/caveator), the Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed.ratio¶27

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticle 227¶13

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Orders and decreetal orders dated 22.09.2025 passed in EA No.9/2025 and EA.No.8/2025 (in EA No.6/2023 in EP No.20/2021 in OS No.232/2011) by the District Munsif Court, Nagapattinam, sought to be set aside with a direction that the 2nd respondent Trust let in petitioner-side evidence.¶13
District Munsif Court, Nagapattinam · 22.09.2025
Prior proceeding
Original suit O.S. No.232 of 2011 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Nagapattinam, from which the execution proceedings arise.¶13
Prior proceeding
Execution Petition E.P. No.20 of 2021 filed pursuant to the suit.¶13
Prior proceeding
Execution Application E.A. No.6 of 2023 in the execution petition.¶13
Prior proceeding
Order and decreetal order in E.A. No.8 of 2025 dated 22.09.2025 (challenged in CRP No.6282 of 2025); original spellings as printed.¶17
Prior proceeding
After filing of the revisions, the respondent/decree holder took possession of the subject property; petitioner reserved the right to challenge the factum of possession in independent proceedings (brought on record by petitioner's counsel and confirmed by counsel for the first respondent/caveator).¶22

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Haja Bakrudeen S/o.Manjur Shah Maraikayar¶7
Ms.S.Aswin Karthikeyan
respondent
Sirajudeen S/o.Meera Hussain¶10
Mr.V. Raghupathi
respondent
Nagore Dargha Rep. by its Managing Trustee¶11
Mr.V. Raghupathi

Coram

AI extract

P.B. Balajiauthor¶5

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 11 Dec 2025 · December
Registered: 5 Dec 2025
Case no.: CRP/6231/2025
CNR: HCMA012818902025
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: P.b. Balaji
Disposal: DISMISSED
Case type: CRP

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from P.b. Balaji

A.Anitha Vs M.Raja
10 Dec 2025
Krishna Reddy Vs Vidhubala
10 Dec 2025
R.Usha Vs a.Meganathan
10 Dec 2025
Sakunthala Vs Vasantha
11 Dec 2025
S.P.Subbiah (Deceased) 1. R.Kanthalakshmi, Vs F.Nasurin (Deceased) S.Faruk (Deceased) 1. Bose
11 Dec 2025
Balamurugan Automobiles Vs P.T.M.N.Perumal Chettiar
11 Dec 2025

Cite this judgement

Haja Bakrudeen v. Sirajudeen, CRP/6231/2025 (MAD), decided on 11 December 2025.

The Madras High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Constitution of IndiaArticle 227

View all statutes

Procedural history6

Orders and decreetal orders dated 22.09.2025 passed in EA No.9/2025 and EA.No.8/2025 (in EA No.6/2023 in EP No.20/2021 in OS No.232/2011) by the District Munsif Court, Nagapattinam, sought to be set aside with a direction that the 2nd respondent Trust let in petitioner-side evidence.District Munsif Court, Nagapattinam · 22.09.2025
Original suit O.S. No.232 of 2011 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Nagapattinam, from which the execution proceedings arise.
Execution Petition E.P. No.20 of 2021 filed pursuant to the suit.

View full history

Bench / Coram

P.B. Balaji

Parties & counsel