Disposed¶26

C. Mugilan v. V.T. Suresh

Madras HC28 Jan 2026CRP/3971/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Speedy disposal direction under Article 227, Constitution of India; CRP No. 3971 of 2025; O.S.No.91 of 2024, Sub Court Tiruttani; declaration of title and mandatory injunction; sale deeds dated 16.11.2017 and 05.04.2018 challenged as null and void; issues not framed; service on 2nd defendant incomplete; expeditious disposal ordered after completion of service; counsel L. Ramu for petitioner; Single Judge S. Sounthar; decided 28-01-2026.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to take steps to serve the 2nd defendant; upon completion of such service, the trial court directed to dispose of O.S.No.91 of 2024 as expeditiously as possible; no costs. ¶26

C. Mugilan Vs V.T. Suresh — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

CRP No. 3971 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 28-01-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SOUNTHAR

¶6

CRP No. 3971 of 2025

C. Mugilan

..Petitioner(s)

V.T. Suresh 2. G.S. Duraisamy Reddy 3. Raja 4. Subramani

¶11

..Respondent(s)

¶12

Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to order speedy disposal of the case in OS No.91 of 2024 pending on the file of the learned Sub Court at Tiruttani.

¶13

For Petitioner: Mr.L.Ramu

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The Civil Revision Petition is filed seeking a direction to the trial court to

¶16

dispose of the suit in O.S.No.91 of 2024 pending on the file of Sub-Court Tiruttani.

¶17

The petitioner herein filed a suit seeking declaration of title and mandatory injunction directing the first defendant to remove unlawful superstructure constructed in the suit property. He also sought for declaration

¶18

Page1 of 4

¶19

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

¶20

CRP No. 3971 of 2025

¶21

that the registered sale deed dated 16.11.2017 and 05.04.2018 were null and void and not binding on the plaintiff. Apart from the above prayer, the petitioner also sought for injunction restraining the first defendant from making any further construction in the suit property.

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though the suit

¶23

was of the year 2024, till date the issues are not framed and therefore, the petitioner seeks a direction to the trial court to dispose of the suit as expeditiously.

¶24

This Court called for remarks from the trial court. A perusal of the remarks submitted by the trial court would indicate that 2^nd defendant in the suit has not been served till date.

¶25

Taking into consideration the service is not completed against the 2^nd defendant, the petitioner is directed to take steps to serve the 2^nd defendant and after service on the 2^nd defendant is completed, the trial court shall dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible.

¶26