- Court
- High Court of Madras
- Decided
- 10 February 2026
- Bench
- S. Sounthar
- Case no.
- CRP 554/2026
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 10-02-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SOUNTHAR CRP Nos. 554 and 555 of 2026 and CMP Nos.2967 and 2968 of 2026 M.S.Pandian, S/o Subbiah, No 1/421, Pillayar Koil Street, Padiyanallur, Chennai 600 052 ..Petitioner(s) in Both CRPs Vs
¶1R.Rathnabai W/o Ramakrishnan,
¶2R.Govindan Alias Govindaraj, S/o.Ramanujam,
¶3S.Kanaga, W/o.Sengaiyya
¶4K.Nirmala, W/o.Krishnan
¶5R.Padmanaban, S/o.Ramanujam
¶6D.Dhanalakshmi, W/o.Dhakishnamurthy
¶7P.Santha, W/o.Perumal Respondents 1 to 7 are Residing at No 38/48, Nammalvarpettai, Paraka Road, Chennai 600 012.
¶8The Sub Registrar Redhills, Thiruvallur District
¶9The Tahsildar, Ponneri Taluk Thiruvallur District-601204
10.The Tahsildar, Purasawalkam Taluk Chennai-600003 Page1 of 5
¶11The District Collector, Thiruvallur District.
… Respondents in both CRPS Common Prayer in CRP Nos.554 and 555 of 2026: Civil Revision petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India to set aside the order dated
24.10.2025 passed by the District Munsif Court, Ponneri, Thiruvallur District in IA Nos.04/2024 and 05/2024 in OS No.18/2018. In Both CRPs For Petitioners : Mr.S.Anil Sandeep For Respondent(s): : Mr.N.Muthuvel Govt. Advocate for R8 to R11 COMMON ORDER These civil revision petitions are filed challenging the orders passed by the Trial Court, dismissing the applications filed by the petitioner seeking issuance of Subpoena to the Tahsildar, Ponneri Taluk and the Inspector of Police, Anti Land Grabbing Special Cell (ALGSC), Central Crime Branch
(CCD), Avadi Commissionerate, Chennai to appear before the court with certified copies of the FIR in Crime No.98 of 2019, charge sheet and the proceedings of the Tahsildar on the death of a person named Munuswamy @ Chinna Maistry to give evidence. Page2 of 5
¶2The petitioner herein filed a suit for declaration that the release deed executed by the defendants 2 to 7 in favour of the first defendant was null and void and for consequential relief of permanent injunction. It is the case of the petitioner that the defendants forged the death certificate of one Munusay @ Chinna Maistry and created void documents. In respect of above said forgery, the petitioner preferred a complaint before the police and based on the said complaint, initially FIR was registered and subsequently charge sheet was filed against the respondents. It is the further case of the petitioner that the Tahsildar sent a communication to the police, confirming the illegality committed by the defendants.
¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the documents referred by the petitioner in his affidavit would help him to establish his case before the civil court. Therefore, Subpoena to be issued to the concerned officer to appear before the court to give evidence with necessary documents.
¶4If the petitioner wants to produce the documents referred in his affidavit, it is always open to him to follow the procedure prescribed under Rule 76 of Civil Rules of Practise, seeking certificate from the court and to produce the same before the concerned officials for the purpose of getting certified copies of the documents. Inspite of certificate issued by the civil court, if the concerned officials failed to issue certified copies of the documents requested Page3 of 5 by the petitioner, then, it is always open him to file an appropriate application before the civil court seeking issuance of Subpoena to the concerned officials. In the case on hand, without exhausting the remedy available under Rule 76 of Civil Rules of Practice, the petitioner straight away filed the instant application seeking issuance of Subpoena. The Trial Court rightly dismissed the said application and I do not find any error warranting interference.
¶5Accordingly, this civil revision petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to exhaust the remedy available under Rule 76 of Civil Rules of Practice. There shall be no order as to costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 10-02-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order MST To The District Munsif, Ponneri. Page4 of 5
S.SOUNTHAR, J. MST 10-02-2026 Page5 of 5
Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.