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.

S.Lakshmamma Vs The State of Tamil Nadu — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

Home
Madras HC
2025
S.Lakshmamma Vs The State of Tamil NaduS.Lakshmamma v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Allowed¶¶28

S.Lakshmamma v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC17 Dec 2025CRP/6530/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRP No. 6530 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Madras, P.B. Balaji J., 17-12-2025. S.Lakshmamma v. The State of Tamil Nadu (District Collector, Thiruvallur) and Tahsildar, Gummidipoondi Taluk. Keywords: Article 227 Constitution of India; civil revision petition; returned endorsement; physical filing versus e-filing; notification dated 25.08.2025; Subordinate Court, Ponneri; OS SR.No.921 of 2025; suit number OS-ATN20230004559C202500022; Court fee stamp papers Rs.13,800/-; acceptance of physical court fee; numbering of suit; non-precedential direction; no costs; connected Miscellaneous Petition closed. Advocates: Shine Kumar R (petitioner); A.Anandan, Government Advocate (respondents).

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petition allowed: Subordinate Court, Ponneri directed to accept the Court fee in physical form in OS SR.No.921 of 2025 and to number the suit if otherwise in order; no costs; connected Miscellaneous Petition closed; order expressly non-precedential.

Why is it important?

On the peculiar facts and circumstances, the Court directed the Subordinate Court, Ponneri to accept the Court fee in physical form in OS SR.No.921 of 2025 and to proceed to number the suit, if it is otherwise in order. ¶¶27

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Civil Revision Petition allowed: Subordinate Court, Ponneri directed to accept the Court fee in physical form in OS SR.No.921 of 2025 and to number the suit if otherwise in order; no costs; connected Miscellaneous Petition closed; order expressly non-precedential.

Issue for consideration

Whether the returned endorsement can be set aside and the Subordinate Court, Ponneri can be directed to accept the court fee already purchased in physical form and proceed with the suit, notwithstanding the notification dated 25.08.2025 permitting filing only through e-filing.

Court's answer

On the peculiar facts and circumstances, the Court directed the Subordinate Court, Ponneri to accept the Court fee in physical form in OS SR.No.921 of 2025 and to proceed to number the suit, if it is otherwise in order.

Ratio / Principle

The relief was granted expressly without treating the order as a precedent to be followed in other cases, i.e., the direction is confined to the peculiar facts of this case.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Revision Petition (Article 227, Constitution of India) before the Madras High Court (P.B. Balaji J.), decided 17-12-2025. Suit papers were first presented in physical form on 28.11.2025, when physical filing was permissible, with Court fee stamp papers of Rs.13,800/- already purchased; filing failed as the Judge was on leave, and on re-presentation on 01.12.2025 the Registry of the Subordinate Court, Ponneri returned the papers insisting on e-filing alone per its notification dated 25.08.2025. Holding, on the peculiar facts and expressly without treating the order as precedent, the Court directed the Subordinate Court, Ponneri to accept the Court fee in physical form in OS SR.No.921 of 2025 and to number the suit if otherwise in order. Petition allowed with no costs; connected Miscellaneous Petition closed; order copy to be issued on 18.12.2025.

A

CRP No. 6530 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 17-12-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI

CRP No. 6530 of 2025

S.Lakshmamma

W/o. Late S. Venkatakrishnama Raju, Residing at No.247, Billakuppam Village, S.R. Kandigai Post, Gummidipoondi Taluk, Thiruvallur District 601 201.

Petitioner(s)

Vs

The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by the District Collector, Thiruvallur District 601 201.

2.The Tahsildar Gummidipoondi Taluk, Thiruvallur District 601 201.

Respondent(s)

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside returned endorsement and to direct the Subordinate Court, Ponneri to accept the court fee in physical form in OS-ATN20230004559C202500022 of 2025 already purchased by the petitioner and proceed with the suit in accordance with law and grant such further or other orders as this Court.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.Shine Kumar R For Respondents : Mr.A.Anandan Government Advocate for R1 & R2

1

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

CRP No. 6530 of 2025

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed to direct the Subordinate Court, Ponneri to accept the Court fee in physical form in OSATN20230004559C202500022 of 2025 already purchased by the petitioner and proceed with the suit in accordance with law.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate for the respondents.

The learned counsel for the petitioner state that the suit papers were presented in physical form on 28.11.2025, as was permissible on the prevailing date, and that the Court fee stamp papers have already been purchased. However, as the Judge concerned was on leave on the said date, the suit could not be filed on 28.11.2025. When the suit was presented subsequently on 01.12.2025, the Registry has returned the same, on the ground that filing could be made only through e-filing, as per the notification dated 25.08.2025. He further state that the petitioner had already paid the Court fee to the tune of Rs.13,800/- and the Court fee stamp papers have also been used for filing the suit, by typing the cause title of the suit on the stamp papers as well.

2

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

CRP No. 6530 of 2025

The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents state that this order should not be treated as precedent for other cases.

In the light of the peculiar facts and circumstances, and without treating this order as a precedent to be followed in other cases, I am inclined to direct the Subordinate Court, Ponneri to accept the Court fee in physical form in OS SR.No.921 of 2025 and proceed to number the suit, if it is otherwise in order. This order shall not be treated as a precedent in future cases.

With the aforesaid terms, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed. No costs.

Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

17-12-2025

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

Note: Issue order copy on 18.12.2025

To

The Subordinate Court, Ponneri.

3

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

CRP No. 6530 of 2025

P.B.BALAJI J. jd

CRP No. 6530 of 2025

17-12-2025

4

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

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the returned endorsement can be set aside and the Subordinate Court, Ponneri can be directed to accept the court fee already purchased in physical form and proceed with the suit, notwithstanding the notification dated 25.08.2025 permitting filing only through e-filing.¶¶14
The court held
On the peculiar facts and circumstances, the Court directed the Subordinate Court, Ponneri to accept the Court fee in physical form in OS SR.No.921 of 2025 and to proceed to number the suit, if it is otherwise in order.ratio¶¶27

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticle 227¶¶14

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Return of the suit papers (returned endorsement) by the Registry of the Subordinate Court, Ponneri on re-presentation on 01.12.2025, on the ground that filing could be made only through e-filing as per the notification dated 25.08.2025.¶¶22
Registry, Subordinate Court, Ponneri · 01.12.2025
Prior proceeding
Suit papers were presented in physical form on 28.11.2025 (then permissible) and the Court fee stamp papers had already been purchased.¶¶22
Prior proceeding
The suit could not be filed on 28.11.2025 because the Judge concerned was on leave on that date.¶¶22
Prior proceeding
The petitioner had already paid Court fee of Rs.13,800/- and the stamp papers had been used for filing by typing the cause title of the suit on them.¶¶22
Prior proceeding
Learned Government Advocate submitted that the order in this matter should not be treated as precedent for other cases.¶¶26

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
S.Lakshmamma¶¶7
Mr.Shine Kumar R
respondent
The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by the District Collector, Thiruvallur District 601 201¶¶11
Mr.A.Anandan
respondent
The Tahsildar Gummidipoondi Taluk, Thiruvallur District 601 201¶¶12

Coram

AI extract

P.B. BALAJIauthor¶¶5

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 17 Dec 2025 · December
Registered: 16 Dec 2025
Case no.: CRP/6530/2025
CNR: HCMA013073672025
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: P.b. Balaji
Disposal: ALLOWED
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

R. Vanniyan Vs Thangavasuki
16 Dec 2025
C.Nandha Kumar Vs T.Praveena
16 Dec 2025
K. Ravi Vs Palanivel
16 Dec 2025
E.Mohan Raj Vs L.Fukokuva Leyanstic Anandh
17 Dec 2025
E.Mallika Vs T.D. Subramania Mudhaliar (Died) 1. Jayakumar
17 Dec 2025
E.Velu Vs Vidya
17 Dec 2025

Cite this judgement

S.Lakshmamma v. The State of Tamil Nadu, CRP/6530/2025 (MAD), decided on 17 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 history5

Return of the suit papers (returned endorsement) by the Registry of the Subordinate Court, Ponneri on re-presentation on 01.12.2025, on the ground that filing could be made only through e-filing as per the notification dated 25.08.2025.Registry, Subordinate Court, Ponneri · 01.12.2025
Suit papers were presented in physical form on 28.11.2025 (then permissible) and the Court fee stamp papers had already been purchased.
The suit could not be filed on 28.11.2025 because the Judge concerned was on leave on that date.

View full history

Bench / Coram

P.B. BALAJI

Parties & counsel