S.Subramaniyan Vs Krishnan — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

S.Subramaniyan Vs Krishnan — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Registry directed to return the revision papers to the learned counsel for the petitioners to enable him to file a corrected decreetal order; trial court directed to consider I.A.Sr.No.565 of 2026 and pass appropriate orders after deleting the names of Savithiri and Gayathri; no costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the civil miscellaneous petitions CMP Nos.31016 and 31023 of 2025, filed under Section 151 of CPC seeking acceptance of the cause title in CRP.Sr.Nos.99082 and 99083 of 2025, should be allowed. +1 more

Court's answer

The petitions to accept the cause title in CMP.Nos.31016 and 31023 of 2025 were dismissed, and the registry was directed to return the revision papers to the learned counsel for the petitioners to enable him to file the corrected decreetal order, with no costs.

Ratio / Principle

The trial court was directed to consider the application filed by the petitioners in I.A.Sr.No.565 of 2026 and pass appropriate orders after deleting the names of Savithiri and Gayathri, and the petitioners were directed to file a corrected decreetal order.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Madras (S. Sounthar, J.), order dated 10-02-2026 in CMP Nos.31016 and 31023 of 2025 in CRP.Sr.Nos.99082 and 99083 of 2025: The civil miscellaneous petitions, filed under Section 151 of CPC to accept the cause title in the civil revision petitions (which sought setting aside, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, of the fair and decretal orders dated 04.09.2024 in I.A.Nos.316 and 317 of 2024 in O.S.No.3 of 2019, Additional District Court, Kallakurichi), were dismissed. The 5th respondent in the interlocutory applications, Ragavan, had died; his legal heirs' names appeared in the decreetal order though not in the fair order, and no petition to bring them on record had been filed in the suit. The petitioners had filed I.A.Sr.No.565 of 2026 to delete the names of Savithiri and Gayathri from the impugned decreetal order. The trial court was directed to decide that application after deleting those names, the petitioners were directed to file a corrected decreetal order, and the registry was directed to return the revision papers to the petitioners' counsel. No costs.

CMP No. 31016 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-02-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SOUNTHAR

CMP Nos.31016 and 31023 of 2025 in

CRP.Sr.Nos.99082 and 99083 of 2025

In both CMP’s

S.Subramaniyan

Dhanraj

Natarajan

Subramani

Nallathambi

..Petitioners(s)

Vs

Krishnan

Kesavan

Madhavan

Govindan

Ragavan (Died)

Savithiri

Gayathri

Balakrishnan

Sripathi

Hari Rao

..Respondent(s)

__________ Page1 of 5

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

CMP No. 31016 of 2025

Prayer in CMP No. 31016 of 2025 :- The civil miscellaneous petition is filed under Section 151 of CPC, praying to accept the cause title given in the above CRP SR No.99082/2025 on the file of this Court.

Prayer in CRP.Sr.No. 99082 of 2025 :- Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 04.09.2024 made in I.A.No.316 of 2024 in O.S.No.3 of 2019 on the file of the learned Additional District Court, Kallakurichi

Prayer in CMP No. 31023 of 2025 :- The civil miscellaneous petition is filed under Section 151 of CPC, praying to accept the cause title given in the above CRP SR No.99083/2025 on the file of this Court.

Prayer in CRP.Sr.No. 99083 of 2025 :- Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 04.09.2024 made in I.A.No.317 of 2024 in O.S.No.3 of 2019 on the file of the learned Additional District Court, Kallakurichi

For Petitioners: N.Manoharan in both CMP’s

ORDER

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the 5^th respondent in I.A.Nos.316 and 317 of 2024 namely Ragavan died and the names of his legal heirs were shown in the decreetal order. However, the same has not been shown in the fair order.

Page2 of 5

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

CMP No. 31016 of 2025

It is also stated that no petition to bring on record the legal representatives of the deceased Ragavan has been filed in the present suit in O.S.No.3 of 2019 and their names are wrongly included in the decreetal order. The learned counsel further submitted that necessary petition has been filed in I.A.Sr.No.565 of 2026 seeking to delete the names of Savithiri and Gayathri reflected in the impugned decreetal order.

The trial court is directed to consider the application filed by the petitioners in I.A.Sr.No.565 of 2026 and pass appropriate orders after deleting the names of Savithiri and Gayathri. The petitioners are directed to file corrected decreetal order.

In view of the above direction, the petitions to accept the cause title in CMP.Nos.31016 and 31023 of 2025 are dismissed. The registry is directed to return the revision papers to the learned counsel for the petitioners to enable him to file corrected decreetal order. No costs.

10-02-2026

Index: Yes/No

Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No nr

__________ Page3 of 5

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

CMP No. 31016 of 2025

To

The Additional District Court, Kallakurichi.

__________ Page4 of 5

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

CMP No. 31016 of 2025

S.SOUNTHAR, J.

nr

CMP No. 31016 and 31023 of 2025 in

CRP.Sr.No.99082 and 99083 of 2025

10-02-2026

__________ Page5 of 5

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