Mohammed Meeran v. Krishna Kumar

Madras HC26 Mar 2026CRP/1755/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Recall of witness D.W.1 after closure of defendant's evidence; reopening of evidence; valuable right of defendant to effectively defend case; interlocutory applications I.A. Nos. 321 & 322 of 2025 in OS No. 317 of 2018; Principal District Munsif Tindivanam; Civil Revision Petitions CRP Nos. 1755 & 1760 of 2026 with CMP Nos. 8018 & 8007 of 2026; High Court of Madras; opportunity to be granted where suit posted for arguments; fair and decreetal order set aside; expeditious disposal of suit directed.

What did the court decide?

Both Civil Revision Petitions allowed; orders in I.A. Nos. 321 & 322 of 2025 in OS No. 317 of 2018 set aside and the interlocutory applications allowed; Trial Judge directed to dispose of the suit expeditiously; connected miscellaneous petitions (CMP Nos. 8018 & 8007 of 2026) closed; no costs. ¶¶37

Mohammed Meeran Vs Krishna Kumar — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶37

Issue for consideration

Whether the defendant (petitioner) should be permitted to reopen and recall D.W.1 after closure of the defendant's evidence in OS No. 317 of 2018, the suit being posted for arguments.

¶¶34

Court's answer

Since the applications were filed immediately after closure of the defendant's evidence and the suit is only posted for arguments, the petitioner must be given an opportunity to recall D.W.1; denial of such opportunity would defeat the defendant's valuable right to effectively defend the case.

¶¶34

Ratio / Principle

I.A. Nos. 321 & 322 of 2025 in OS No. 317 of 2018 on the file of Principal District Munsif, Tindivanam are set aside and the said interlocutory applications are allowed; the learned Trial Judge is directed to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible.

¶¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Revision Petitions (High Court of Madras, T.V. Thamilselvi J., 26-03-2026) against the fair and decreetal orders dated 07.02.2026 of the Principal District Munsif, Tindivanam in I.A. Nos. 321 & 322 of 2025 in OS No. 317 of 2018, whereby the defendant was refused an opportunity to reopen and recall D.W.1 immediately after closure of the defence evidence: Allowed. Held that as the applications were filed immediately after closure of the defendant's evidence and the suit was merely posted for arguments, the petitioner had to be given the opportunity, failing which the defendant's valuable right to effectively defend the case would be defeated. The interlocutory applications were set aside and allowed; the Trial Judge was directed to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible; connected miscellaneous petitions were closed; no costs.

¶1

CRP No. 1755 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 26-03-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

¶6

CRP No. 1755 of 2026 AND

¶7

CMP NO. 8018 OF 2026,CRP NO. 1760 OF 2026,CMP NO. 8007 OF 2026 1. Mohammed Meeran S/o. Mohammed Younis Door No. 34/6, Keeraikara Street Kasba Tindivanam Tindivanam

¶8

Petitioner(s)

¶9

¶10

Krishna Kumar S/o. Ganabathi Mudaliyar Door No.1A, Pillaiyar Koil Street Roshanai Kasba Tindivanam Road Tindivanam Dt. 604001

¶11

Respondent(s) CRP No. 1760 of 2026 1. Mohammed Meeran, S/o. Mohammed Younis, Door No. 34/6, Keeraikara Street, Kasba Tindivanam, Tindivanam. Appellant(s) Vs 1. Krishna Kumar, S/o. Ganabathi Mudaliyar, Door No.1A, Pillaiyar Koil Street, Roshanai, Kasba Tindivanam Road, Tindivanam Dt. 604001

¶12

Respondent(s)

¶13

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

¶14

CRP No. 1755 of 2026

¶15

CRP No. 1755 of 2026

¶16

PRAYER

¶17

To set aside the fair and decreetal order passed in I.A. No. 322 of 2025 in OS No. 317 of 2018 dt. 07.02.2026 on the file of Principal District Munsif Tindivanam by allowing the present CRP

¶18

CRP No. 1760 of 2026

¶19

PRAYER

¶20

To set aside the fair and Decreetal order passed in I.A. No. 321 of 2025 in OS No. 317 of 2018 dated 07.02.2026 on the file of Principal District Munsif, Tindivanam, by allowing the present Civil Revision Petition and thereby render justice.

¶21

For Petitioner(s): MR.ESWAR FOR M/S.Eswar, Kumar and Rao

¶22

For Respondent(s):

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Aggrieved by the order passed by the Trial Judge in I.A. Nos. 321 & 322

¶25

of 2025 in OS No. 317 of 2018, on the file of Principal District Munsif Tindivanam, applications to reopen and recall, the defendant has preferred these revisions.

¶26

Before the Trial Court, immediately after the closure of the defendant’s

¶27

evidence, the petitioner filed an application to recall D.W.1 on the same day, in

¶28

order to put forth certain important questions that arose after completion of the

¶29

cross-examination. However, the Trial Court failed to grant such an opportunity.

¶30

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

¶31

CRP No. 1755 of 2026

¶32

Considering the fact that the suit is now posted for arguments and that

¶33

the applications were filed immediately after closure of the defendant’s

¶34

evidence, this Court is of the view that the petitioner must be given an opportunity. If such opportunity is denied, the valuable right of the defendant to effectively defend the case would be defeated.

¶35

Accordingly, I.A. Nos. 321 & 322 of 2025 in OS No. 317 of 2018, on

¶36

the file of Principal District Munsif Tindivanam, are set aside, and the said interlocutory applications are allowed. The learned Trial Judge is directed to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible.

¶37