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.Rathna Devi Vs M.Hariharan — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

Home
Madras HC
2025
S.Rathna Devi Vs M.HariharanS.Rathna Devi v. M.Hariharan

Disposed¶¶29

S.Rathna Devi v. M.Hariharan

Madras HC12 Mar 2025CRP(MD)/449/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench), CRP(MD)No.449 of 2022 and CMP(MD)No.1971 of 2022, dated 12.03.2025; Coram G.R.Swaminathan J. (author) and M.Jothiraman J. Article 227 revision by Defendants 1 & 2 (Rathna Devi, Abinesh) to strike off plaint in O.S No.98 of 2021 (Principal District Munsif, Kumbakonam) of plaintiff M.Hariharan; prior adverse decree in O.S No.4 of 2015 (II Additional District Judge, Thanjavur); appeal AS(MD)No.19 of 2019 pending. Held: suit not struck off but stayed till disposal of AS(MD)No.19 of 2019; interim stay made absolute; CRP disposed, no costs. No precedent cases or monetary amounts involved.

What did the court decide?

Civil revision petition disposed of accordingly; plaint in O.S No.98 of 2021 not struck off but stayed till disposal of AS(MD)No.19 of 2019; interim stay made absolute; connected miscellaneous petition closed; no costs.

Why is it important?

The suit O.S No.98 of 2021 cannot be struck off, but it has to be stayed till the disposal of AS(MD)No.19 of 2019, whose outcome will decide the fate of the suit. ¶¶28

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Civil revision petition disposed of accordingly; plaint in O.S No.98 of 2021 not struck off but stayed till disposal of AS(MD)No.19 of 2019; interim stay made absolute; connected miscellaneous petition closed; no costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the plaint bearing O.S No.98 of 2021 pending on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Kumbakonam should be struck off. +1 more

Court's answer

The suit O.S No.98 of 2021 cannot be struck off, but it has to be stayed till the disposal of AS(MD)No.19 of 2019, whose outcome will decide the fate of the suit.

Ratio / Principle

Since the issue raised in O.S No.98 of 2021 is inextricably linked to the outcome of AS(MD)No.19 of 2019, the suit cannot be allowed to proceed till the disposal of the appeal.

Key takeaways

The interim stay granted in CRP(MD)No.449 of 2022 is made absolute.ratio¶¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by Defendants 1 & 2 (Rathna Devi and Abinesh) seeking strike-off of the plaint in O.S No.98 of 2021 pending before the Principal District Munsif Court, Kumbakonam, filed by plaintiff M.Hariharan. The plaintiff's claim had already been decided against him in O.S No.4 of 2015 (II Additional District Judge, Thanjavur); aggrieved thereby he has filed first appeal AS(MD)No.19 of 2019 before the Madurai Bench. Held: since the issue raised in O.S No.98 of 2021 is inextricably linked to the outcome of AS(MD)No.19 of 2019, the fate of the suit depends on the first appeal; the suit cannot be struck off but shall stand stayed till the disposal of the appeal; the interim stay granted in CRP(MD)No.449 of 2022 is made absolute; the revision petition is disposed of with no costs and the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

A

CRP(MD)No.449 of 2022

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 12.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN

CRP(MD)No.449 of 2022 and CMP(MD)No.1971 of 2022

1.Rathna Devi

2.Abinesh ... Petitioners 1 & 2/ Defendants 1 & 2

Vs.

1.M.Hariharan ... Respondent / Plaintiff

2.The Sub Registrar, Kutcheri Road, Kumbakonam Town

5.The District Registrar, Kutcheri Road, Kumabakonam Town. ... Respondents / Defendants 3 & 4

Prayer : Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to strike of the plaint bearing O.S No.98 of 2021 pending on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Kumbakonam.

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

1/4

CRP(MD)No.449 of 2022

For Petitioners : Mrs.Chitra Sampath, Senior Counsel for Mr.V.Nandhakumar

For Respondents : Mr.Parthasarathy for Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan for R1

Mr.C.Senthil Murugan for R2 to R3

Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh Additional Government Pleader for R4 to R9

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.)

The defendants 1 and 2 have filed this civil revision petition to strike off the suit in O.S No.98 of 2021 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Kumbakonam. The case of the revision petitioners is that the claim projected by the plaintiff in the suit had already been decided against him in O.S No.4 of 2015 filed by him before the II Additional District Judge, Thanjavur.

2.It is not in dispute that aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, Hariharan/the first respondent herein has filed AS(MD)No.19 of 2019 before this Court. Since the issue raised in O.S No.98 of 2021 is inextricably linked to the outcome of AS(MD)No.19 of 2019, O.S No. 98 of 2021 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Kumbakonam cannot be allowed to be proceeded with till the disposal of the appeal.

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

2/4

CRP(MD)No.449 of 2022

The fate of the suit will depend on the outcome of the first appeal. O.S No.98 of 2021 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Kumbakonam cannot be struck off. But it has to be stayed till the disposal of AS(MD)No.19 of 2019. The interim stay granted in CRP(MD)No.449 of 2022 is made absolute.

3.This civil revision petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

[G.R.S., J.] [M.J.R., J.] 12.03.2025

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No SKM

To:

1.The Principal District Munsif Court, Kumbakonam. 2.II Additional District Judge, Thanjavur.

Copy to:

The Record Keeper, V.R. Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

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

3/4

CRP(MD)No.449 of 2022

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J and M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.

SKM

CRP(MD)No.449 of 2022 and CMP(MD)No.1971 of 2022

12.03.2025

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/4

Issues for consideration

2 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the plaint bearing O.S No.98 of 2021 pending on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Kumbakonam should be struck off.¶¶13
The court held
The suit O.S No.98 of 2021 cannot be struck off, but it has to be stayed till the disposal of AS(MD)No.19 of 2019, whose outcome will decide the fate of the suit.ratio¶¶28
2.
Whether and in what manner O.S No.98 of 2021 may proceed while AS(MD)No.19 of 2019 (the appeal against the prior decree in O.S No.4 of 2015) remains pending before this Court.medium confidence¶¶28
The court held
Since the issue raised in O.S No.98 of 2021 is inextricably linked to the outcome of AS(MD)No.19 of 2019, the suit cannot be allowed to proceed till the disposal of the appeal.ratio¶¶24

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
The plaint bearing O.S No.98 of 2021 filed by plaintiff M.Hariharan, which the revision petitioners seek to have struck off.¶¶13
Principal District Munsif Court, Kumbakonam
Prior proceeding
The plaintiff's claim had already been decided against him in O.S No.4 of 2015 filed by him before the II Additional District Judge, Thanjavur.¶¶23
Prior proceeding
Aggrieved by that judgment and decree, Hariharan (first respondent) filed first appeal AS(MD)No.19 of 2019 before this Court.¶¶24
Prior proceeding
An interim stay had been granted in CRP(MD)No.449 of 2022, which the Court made absolute.¶¶28

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Rathna Devi¶¶8
Mrs.Chitra Sampath (Sr.), Mr.V.Nandhakumar
petitioner
Abinesh¶¶8
Mrs.Chitra Sampath (Sr.), Mr.V.Nandhakumar
respondent
M.Hariharan¶¶10
Mr.Parthasarathy, Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan
respondent
The Sub Registrar, Kutcheri Road, Kumbakonam Town¶¶11
Mr.C.Senthil Murugan
respondent
The District Registrar, Kutcheri Road, Kumabakonam Town¶¶12
Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh

Coram

AI extract

G.R.SWAMINATHANauthor¶¶5
M.JOTHIRAMANmember¶¶5

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 12 Mar 2025 · March
Registered: 7 Mar 2022
Case no.: CRP(MD)/449/2022
CNR: HCMD010176002022
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: G.r.swaminathan M.jothiraman
Disposal: DISPOSED OF
Case type: CRP(MD)

Similar cases

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

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from G.r.swaminathan M.jothiraman

Balamurugan Vs the Commissioner
11 Mar 2025
R. Ramachandran, Vs The Special District Revenue Officer (Land Acquisition)
11 Mar 2025
Lakshmi Vs the District Collector
11 Mar 2025
S.Ratnadevi, Vs M.Hariharan
12 Mar 2025
R.S.Nagarajan, Died, 1.N.Rajesakaran Vs R.S.Gopalan
12 Mar 2025
N.Vanitha Sanjay Vs the Commissioner
12 Mar 2025

Cite this judgement

S.Rathna Devi v. M.Hariharan, CRP(MD)/449/2022 (MAD), decided on 12 March 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 history4

The plaint bearing O.S No.98 of 2021 filed by plaintiff M.Hariharan, which the revision petitioners seek to have struck off.Principal District Munsif Court, Kumbakonam
The plaintiff's claim had already been decided against him in O.S No.4 of 2015 filed by him before the II Additional District Judge, Thanjavur.
Aggrieved by that judgment and decree, Hariharan (first respondent) filed first appeal AS(MD)No.19 of 2019 before this Court.

View full history

Bench / Coram

G.R.SWAMINATHAN and M.JOTHIRAMAN

Parties & counsel