Dismissed¶25

Indhran (Died) Kasthuri v. Banumathi

Madras HC8 Jun 2026CRP(MD)/1381/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Article 227; striking off plaint; abuse of process of Court; Section 151; Order 6 Rule 16(c); effective/alternative remedy; subsequent events; suit rendered infructuous; cancellation of mortgage deed; surrender of possession; FIR; arrest of plaintiff; deed of undertaking 18.08.2022; O.S.No.164 of 2020; District Munsif Madurai; maintainability; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; C.R.P(MD).No.1381 of 2026; revision dismissed; no costs.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the petitioner; the Civil Revision Petition was dismissed with no costs and the connected Miscellaneous Petition (C.M.P(MD).No.6738 of 2026) was closed, with liberty/observation that the defendant may move the learned District Munsif under Section 151 or Order 6 Rule 16(c), such application to be taken up first as it affects maintainability. ¶25

Indhran (Died) Kasthuri Vs Banumathi — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether the Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 should be entertained to strike off the plaint in O.S.No.164 of 2020 (as an abuse of the process of Court / rendered infructuous by subsequent events), or whether the defendant should be relegated to an application before the learned District Munsif invoking Section 151 or Order 6 Rule 16(c)

¶20

Court's answer

The Court declined to entertain the revision straight away because an effective remedy is available to the defendant: the defendant may file an application invoking either Section 151 or Order 6 Rule 16(c) before the trial court, letting in evidence to substantiate the averments, to seek dismissal of the suit either as an abuse of the process of Court or as having been rendered infructuous by subsequent events.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

Since an application to dismiss the suit as abuse of process or as infructuous would have an implication on the very maintainability of the suit, the learned District Munsif at Madurai was requested to take up such an application first, dispose of it, and only thereafter proceed with the other applications.

¶24

Key takeaways

Observation that the suit was filed on 24.02.2020 when the plaintiff was admittedly in possession, and that subsequent events (registration of an FIR at the instance of the deceased Indhran, the plaintiff's arrest and incarceration, cancellation of the mortgage deed and handing over of possession) have rendered the suit infructuous; however, the Court expressly declined to entertain the revision on that basis straight away and left the point to be agitated before the trial court.obiter¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India sought striking off of the plaint in O.S.No.164 of 2020 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Madurai, a suit for injunction presented by the alleged mortgagee. The petitioner (defendant, legal representative of deceased mortgagor Indhran) pleaded that after cancellation of the alleged mortgage and surrender of possession, and after the plaintiff's arrest on a Central Crime Branch complaint and her deed of undertaking dated 18.08.2022, continuance of the suit was an abuse of the process of Court. Held, dismissing the revision: on the date of filing of the suit (24.02.2020) the plaintiff was admittedly in possession; while subsequent events may have rendered the suit infructuous, the defendant has an effective remedy to file an application invoking either Section 151 or Order 6 Rule 16(c) to seek dismissal of the suit as an abuse of process or as infructuous, and the Court would not entertain the revision when such remedy exists. Since such an application would bear on the very maintainability of the suit, the learned District Munsif, Madurai was requested to take it up first and dispose of it before other applications. Revision dismissed, no costs; connected Miscellaneous Petition closed.

¶1

C.R.P(MD).No.1381 of 2026

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 08.06.2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN

¶6

C.R.P(MD).No.1381 of 2026 and C.M.P(MD).No.6738 of 2026

¶7

Indhran (Died) Kasthuri ... Petitioner

¶8

(cause title is accepted vide Court order dated 15.04.2026 made in C.M.P(MD).No.18963 of 2025 in C.R.P(MD).SR.No.99208 of 2025)

Banumathi

... Respondent

PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to call for the records pertaining to the plaint in O.S.No.164 of 2020 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Madurai and struck off the same.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Navaneetharaja

¶14

ORDER

¶15

I have heard Mr.K.Navaneetharaja appearing for the petitioner. The plea of the petitioner is that after having cancelled the alleged mortgage said to have been executed by her husband, one Indhran in favour of the plaintiff and having surrendered possession of the property, yet again, the alleged mortgagee has presented a suit seeking to pursue the suit whereunder she wants a decree for injunction not to be evicted except by due process of law.

¶16

1/4

¶17

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

¶18

C.R.P(MD).No.1381 of 2026

¶19

2.It is the plea of Mr.K.Navaneetharaja that pursuant to a complaint lodged before the Central Crime Branch at Madurai, the plaintiff was arrested and remanded. Thereafter, she executed a deed of undertaking on 18.08.2022 in the presence of the Superintendent of Prison(Women), Madurai, Yet again, she is seeking to pursue the remedy. Hence, he pleads that this is the case for striking off the suit as the continuance thereof amounts to an abuse of the process of Court.

¶20

3.On the date of filing of the suit, namely, 24.02.2020, admittedly, the plaintiff was in possession of the property. It was on account of the subsequent events, namely, registration of an FIR at the instance of the deceased Indhran, plaintiff's arrest and incarceration, that took over the original state of affairs and resulted in the plaintiff cancelling the mortgage deed and also handing over the possession. By virtue of the subsequent events, the suit has been rendered infructuous. However, I do not want to entertain a revision straight away. This is on account of the fact that the defendant is always entitled to file an application invoking either Section 151 or Order 6 Rule 16(c) and let in evidence to substantiate the averments made therein. When an effective remedy is available to the defendant, I do not want to entertain a revision. It is open to the defendant to file an application to dismiss the suit either as an abuse of process of Court or as having been rendered infructuous by

¶21

2/4

¶22

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

¶23

C.R.P(MD).No.1381 of 2026

¶24

virtue of subsequent events before the learned Trial Judge. Since such an application if filed would have implication on the very maintainability of the suit, the learned District Munsif at Madurai is requested to take up that application first and dispose of the same and thereafter, proceed with the other applications.

¶25

4.With the above observations, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶26

08.06.2026

¶27

NCC:Yes/No Index:Yes/No Rmk

¶28

To :-

¶29