Dismissed¶43

Saraswathi v. Palanichamy Gounder

Madras HC9 Mar 2026CRP(MD)/353/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench; C.R.P.(MD)No.353 of 2026 decided 09.03.2026 by V.Lakshminarayanan, J.; Saraswathi v. Palanichamy Goundar and others; maintainability of Section 115 CPC revision when statutory appeal lies; Order XXI Rules 97, 98, 99, 100 and 103 CPC; execution proceeding E.P.No.7 of 2023; execution application E.A.No.15 of 2025 dismissed by District Munsif, Oddanchatram on 07.11.2025; revision dismissed with liberty to file appeal and exclusion of time spent in revision.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal against the impugned order; the period spent during the pendency of this revision to stand excluded; no costs; connected Miscellaneous Petition (C.M.P.(MD)No.1608 of 2026) closed; Registry directed to return the original impugned order to the petitioner's counsel for preferring the appeal.

Saraswathi Vs Palanichamy Gounder — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶43

Issue for consideration

Whether the Civil Revision Petition challenging the District Munsif, Oddanchatram's order in E.A.No.15 of 2025 in E.P.No.7 of 2023 (dismissing the petitioner's application under Order XXI Rule 97 CPC) is maintainable, given that orders under Order XXI Rule 98 or 100 are appealable as decrees under Order XXI Rule 103 CPC.

¶37

Court's answer

In terms of Order XXI Rule 103 of the Code of Civil Procedure, any order passed under Order XXI Rule 98 or 100 is subject to an appeal, as if it were a decree.

¶37

Ratio / Principle

An application filed under Order XXI Rule 97 is adjudicated under Order XXI Rule 98; similarly, an application filed under Order XXI Rule 99 is adjudicated under Order XXI Rule 100.

¶38

Key takeaways

When an appeal lies, a revision is not maintainable; accordingly the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal against the impugned order.ratio¶39

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Revision Petition under Section 115 CPC by Saraswathi challenging the fair and decreetal order dated 07.11.2025 passed by the District Munsif, Oddanchatram, in E.A.No.15 of 2025 in E.P.No.7 of 2023, dismissing her application under Order XXI Rule 97 CPC. Held (V.Lakshminarayanan, J., Madurai Bench, 09.03.2026): under Order XXI Rule 103 CPC, any order passed under Order XXI Rule 98 or 100 is subject to an appeal as if it were a decree; an application under Order XXI Rule 97 is adjudicated under Rule 98 (and one under Rule 99 under Rule 100); since an appeal lies against the impugned order, a revision is not maintainable. The Civil Revision Petition was dismissed with liberty to prefer an appeal, the period spent in the revision to stand excluded, no costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition closed.

¶1

C.R.P.(MD)No.353 of 2026

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH Court

¶3

DATED : 09.03.2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN

¶6

C.R.P.(MD)No.353 of 2026 & C.M.P.(MD)No.1608 of 2026

Saraswathi

... Petitioner

vs.

1.Palanichamy Goundar

¶11

2.Kandasamy Goundar

¶12

Chinnappa Goundar (Died)

¶13

3.P.Rajendran

¶14

P.Kaliappan (Died)

¶15

4.P.Kandasamy

¶16

5.C.Kaliappan

¶17

6.C.Dhandapani

¶18

Muthammal (Died)

¶19

7.K.P.Dhandapani

¶20

8.Nachammal

¶21

9.Chinnasamy

¶22

Page 1 of 5

¶23

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

¶24

C.R.P.(MD)No.353 of 2026

¶25

10.Ponnathal

¶26

11.Kaleeswari

¶27

12.M.K.Karthigai Vel 13.M.K.Selvan 14.M.K.Vellaithai ... Respondents

¶28

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure, to set aside the fair and decreetal order passed by the District Munsif Court, Oddanchatram, in E.A.No.15 of 2025 in E.P.No.7 of 2023, dated 07.11.2025.

¶29

(Prayer amended vide order of this Court dated 09.03.2026 in C.M.P. (MD)No.2267 of 2026 in C.R.P.(MD)No.353 of 2026)

¶30

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Krishnan For Respondents : Ms.V.Muthumani for R1 No appearance for R2 to R4 & R6 to R14

¶31

O R D E R

¶32

This Civil Revision Petition challenges the order passed by the learned District Munsif, Oddanchatram in E.A.No.15 of 2025 in E.P.No.7

¶33

Page 2 of 5

¶34

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

¶35

C.R.P.(MD)No.353 of 2026

¶36

of 2023, dated 07.11.2025 and thereby dismissing the application filed by the petitioner under Order XXI Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

¶37

Though the learned counsel for the petitioner urges on the merits of the application, I have to point out, in terms of Order XXI Rule 103 of the Code of Civil Procedure, any order passed under Order XXI Rule 98 or 100 is subject to an appeal, as if it were a decree.

¶38

The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the application has been filed under Order XXI Rule 97 and not under Order XXI Rule 98. While the submission might look interesting, an application filed under Order XXI Rule 97 is adjudicated under Order XXI Rule 98. Similarly, an application filed under Order XXI Rule 99, is adjudicated under Order XXI Rule 100.

¶39

The petitioner has the right of appeal to challenge the order passed by the learned District Munsif, Oddanchatram. When an appeal lies, a revision is not maintainable. Hence, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed with a liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal against the

¶40

Page 3 of 5

¶41

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

¶42

C.R.P.(MD)No.353 of 2026

¶43

impugned order in this revision. Needless to add, the period spent during the pendency of this revision, will stand excluded. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶44

09.03.2026 (2/2)

¶45

NCC:Yes/No Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order

¶46

mbi

¶47

Note to the Registry: The original of the impugned order shall be returned to the learned counsel for the petitioner forthwith after getting usual endorsement, to enable him to prefer an appeal.

¶48

¶49

The learned District Munsif, Oddanchatram.

¶50

Page 4 of 5

¶51

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

¶52

C.R.P.(MD)No.353 of 2026

¶53

V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.

¶54