Allowed¶23

Dr. N. Rajasekaran v. Smt. N. Vijayalakshmi and another

Madras HC12 Jan 2026A/137/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Original-side application (A No. 137 of 2026), High Court of Judicature at Madras, decided 12-01-2026 by P. Dhanabal, J. Plaintiff in a partition suit sought leave to sue the first defendant regarding Item No.2 of the suit properties situated outside the Court's jurisdiction; leave granted on the ground that Item No.1 lies within jurisdiction and substantial part of cause of action arose within jurisdiction; Registry directed to number the suit if otherwise in order. Counsel for applicant: S. Ambalavanan, R. Jayakumar. No statutes or precedent cases cited.

What did the court decide?

Leave granted to the applicant/plaintiff to sue the first defendant in respect of Item No.2 of the suit schedule properties situated outside the jurisdiction of this Court; Registry directed to number the suit if otherwise in order. ¶23

Dr. N. Rajasekaran Vs Smt. N. Vijayalakshmi and another — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

A No. 137 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 12-01-2026

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

¶5

A No. 137 of 2026

¶6

Dr. N. Rajasekaran S/o.Late S.V.Naveenachandran, Nagavel Illam, No.1/197, Kamarajar Salai, Kottivakkam, Chennai 600 041.

¶7

Applicant(s)

¶8

¶9

Smt. N. Vijayalakshmi and another No.95, Alwarthirunagar, Annexe, Chennai 600 087.

¶10

2.Mr.N.Shanmugam S/o.Late S.V.Naveenachandran, No.16, 5th Cross Street, CIT Colony, Mylapore, Chennai 600 004.

¶11

Respondent(s)

¶12

For Applicant(s): M/S.S. Ambalavanan R.Jayakumar

¶13

For Respondent:

¶14

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

¶15

A No. 137 of 2026

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This application has been filed by the applicant/plaintiff seeking to sue the first defendant in respect of Item No.2 of the suit schedule mentioned properties on the file of this Court.

¶18

According to the applicant, he is the plaintiff in the main suit and filed the suit for partition. The first item of the suit property is situated within the jurisdiction of this Court and the second item of the suit property is situated outside the jurisdiction of this Court. The second defendant is residing within jurisdiction of this Court and the first defendant is residing outside the jurisdiction of this Court. Therefore, a substantial part of the cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of this Court and the suit can be instituted before this Court. The main prayer is for partition thereby the suit can also be filed before this Court. Therefore, the plaintiff filed this present petition.

¶19

This Court heard petitioner side and perused the records.

¶20

The plaintiff has filed a petition to grant leave to institute the suit

¶21

before this Court in respect of the properties which are not situated within

¶22

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

¶23

A No. 137 of 2026 the jurisdiction of this Court. Considering the nature of suit that one of the suit properties is situated within the jurisdiction of this Court, substantial part of cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of this Court and the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to allow this petition and therefore, leave is granted as prayed for.

¶24