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.

Thangavel Pillai Vs Vaiyapuri — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Home
Madras HC
2026
Thangavel Pillai Vs VaiyapuriThangavel Pillai v. Vaiyapuri

Disposed¶39

Thangavel Pillai v. Vaiyapuri

Madras HC25 Mar 2026CMP/5583/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court order closing a stale interim-injunction CMP (No.5583 of 2006) in Second Appeal S.A.No.440 of 2006 arising from O.S.No.106 of 1999, III Additional District Munsif Court, Kallakurichi (Villupuram District). Keywords: Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC 1908; interim injunction; closure of long-pending petition for lack of fruitful purpose; substitution/death of sole appellant and legal representatives (LRs) brought on record 14.02.2013; parties from Ammaiagaram Village, Kallakurichi Taluk; counsel S.Ramachandran for petitioners, M.S.Ahilavan for M/s.G.RM.Palaniappan for second respondent; single bench of R. Sakthivel, J.; decision date 25.03.2026.

What did the court decide?

Considering the age of the Second Appeal, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the Civil Miscellaneous Petition pending; accordingly, the CMP is closed (no interim injunction having been granted till date).

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

Issue for consideration

Whether the interim injunction sought in CMP No.5583 of 2006 (filed 03.03.2006) restraining the respondents from interfering with the petitioners' possession and enjoyment of the suit property should be granted pending disposal of S.A.No.440 of 2006, or whether the long-pending petition should be kept alive.

Court's answer

Considering the age of the Second Appeal, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the Civil Miscellaneous Petition pending; accordingly, the CMP is closed (no interim injunction having been granted till date).

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Madras (R. Sakthivel, J.) — CMP No.5583 of 2006 in S.A.No.440 of 2006, order dated 25.03.2026. Interim-injunction petition under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, filed on March 3, 2006 by the appellants (original sole appellant Thangavel Pillai having died; appellants 2 to 4 substituted as LRs by order dated February 14, 2013 in CMP Nos.1236 to 1238 of 2011) seeking to restrain respondents 1 and 2 from interfering with peaceful possession of the property in O.S.No.106 of 1999 (III Additional District Munsif Court, Kallakurichi) pending disposal of the Second Appeal. Noting that no interim injunction had been granted in the petition till date, and considering the age of the Second Appeal, the Court held that no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the petition pending and closed it. No interim relief granted; no order on merits of the injunction claim.

A

CMP NO.5583 OF 2006 IN S.A.NO.440 OF 2006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL

CMP NO.5583 OF 2006

IN

S.A.NO.440 OF 2006

1.A.Thangavel Pillai (Died)

S/o.Annamalai Pillai Ammaiagaram Village, Kallakurichi Taluk, Villupuram District.

2.Dhanapackiam

W/o. Thangavel Pillai

3.Selvambal

W/o. Thangavel Pillai

4.Thavamani W/o. Ravichandran

… Petitioners / Appellants

(Appellant No.1 died. Appellants 2 to 4 brought on record as LRs’ of the deceased sole appellant vide Order of Court dated February 14, 2013 made in CMP Nos.1236 to 1238 of 2011 in S.A.No.440 of 2006)

Vs.

Page No.1 of 4

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

CMP NO.5583 OF 2006 IN S.A.NO.440 OF 2006

1.Vaiyapuri S/o. Kumarasamy

2.Muthuvel S/o. Vaiyapuri

Respondents 1 and 2 are residing at Ammaiagaram Village, Kallakurichi Taluk, Villupuram District. … Respondents / Respondents

PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 praying to grant an order of interim injunction restraining the respondents their men, agents, servants and subordinate from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Suit Property comprised in O.S.No.106 of 1999 on the file of the III Additional District Munsif Court, Kallakurichi, pending disposal of the above appeal.

For Petitioners : Mr.S.Ramachandran

For Respondent -2 : Mr.M.S.Ahilavan for M/s.G.RM.Palaniappan

O R D E R

Mr.S.Ramachandran, Counsel on record for the petitioners / appellants

and Mr.M.S.Ahilavan, representing M/s.G.RM.Palaniappan, Counsel on

record for the second respondent are before this Court.

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

CMP NO.5583 OF 2006 IN S.A.NO.440 OF 2006

2.This Court has perused the affidavit filed in support of this

Civil Miscellaneous Petition.

3.This Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed under Order

XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 on March 3, 2006 seeking an interim injunction in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents. But till date, no interim injunction was granted in this Civil Miscellaneous Petition.

4.Considering the age of the Second Appeal, this Court is of the

view that no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping this Civil Miscellaneous Petition pending. Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

25.03.2026

TK

Page No.3 of 4

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

CMP NO.5583 OF 2006 IN S.A.NO.440 OF 2006

R. SAKTHIVEL, J.

TK

CMP NO.5583 OF 2006 IN S.A.NO.440 OF 2006

25.03.2026

(2/2)

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

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the interim injunction sought in CMP No.5583 of 2006 (filed 03.03.2006) restraining the respondents from interfering with the petitioners' possession and enjoyment of the suit property should be granted pending disposal of S.A.No.440 of 2006, or whether the long-pending petition should be kept alive.¶37
The court held
Considering the age of the Second Appeal, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the Civil Miscellaneous Petition pending; accordingly, the CMP is closed (no interim injunction having been granted till date).ratio¶39

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2¶25

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Underlying suit O.S.No.106 of 1999 on the file of the III Additional District Munsif Court, Kallakurichi; the suit property is the subject matter of the pending Second Appeal S.A.No.440 of 2006.¶25
Prior proceeding
The present Civil Miscellaneous Petition under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC was filed on March 3, 2006 seeking interim injunction in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.¶37
Prior proceeding
No interim injunction had been granted in the CMP up to the date of this order.¶37
Prior proceeding
Legal representatives of the deceased original appellant were brought on record by order dated February 14, 2013 in CMP Nos.1236 to 1238 of 2011 in S.A.No.440 of 2006.¶17

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
1.A.Thangavel Pillai (Died), through LRs Dhanapackiam, Selvambal and Thavamani (Petitioners / Appellants)¶17
Mr.S.Ramachandran
respondent
1.Vaiyapuri S/o. Kumarasamy and 2.Muthuvel S/o. Vaiyapuri (Respondents / Respondents)¶24
Mr.M.S.Ahilavan, M/s.G.RM.Palaniappan

Coram

AI extract

R.SAKTHIVELauthor¶5

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 25 Mar 2026 · March
Registered: 7 Apr 2006
Case no.: CMP/5583/2006
CNR: HCMA010055172006
Bench: R.sakthivel
Disposal: CLOSED
Case type: CMP

Similar cases

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

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from R.sakthivel

S. Sundaram Vs M. Narayanan
24 Mar 2026
Mr.T.K.Suriyanarayanan[ Died] Vs Raghupathy
24 Mar 2026
Minor Muthu Vs Prema
24 Mar 2026
Gunasekaran Vs 1.S.N.L.JAYABALAN
25 Mar 2026
C.Arumugam (Deceased) Vs Kandaswamy Chettiar(Died)
26 Mar 2026
Arumugham(died) Vs Nithyanandam
26 Mar 2026

Cite this judgement

Thangavel Pillai v. Vaiyapuri, CMP/5583/2006 (MAD), decided on 25 March 2026.

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

Statutes1

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2

View all statutes

Procedural history4

Underlying suit O.S.No.106 of 1999 on the file of the III Additional District Munsif Court, Kallakurichi; the suit property is the subject matter of the pending Second Appeal S.A.No.440 of 2006.
The present Civil Miscellaneous Petition under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC was filed on March 3, 2006 seeking interim injunction in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.

View full history

Bench / Coram

R.SAKTHIVEL

Parties & counsel