Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 78658
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. M. Subramaniam, Mohammed Shaffiq, JJ
C.Sankaralingam – Appellant
Versus
Chennaivazh Thiruthangal Hindu Nadar Uravinmurai Dharma Fund, Regn.No.114/1960 – Respondent
OSA No. 309 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.T.P.Prabakaran
For the Respondents:
Interim relief cannot extend beyond the scope of the main relief sought in a defamation suit.
Headnote:The statute under consideration involves the nature of relief sought in civil suits, particularly in defamation cases. The facts reveal that the appellants, respondents in a defamation suit, sought an interim application for administrative changes, which was considered beyond the suit's scope. The court found no infirmity in the learned Single Judge's dismissal of this application. The main issues include whether such interim relief can be granted outside the suit's relief parameters. The court concluded that the interim relief cannot extend beyond the scope of the main suit, corroborating the earlier decision. Resultantly, the appeal is dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of relief in civil suits (Para 2) |
| 2. scope of interim relief in defamation cases (Para 3 , 4) |
(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.)
The present Original Side Appeal has been instituted to assail the order dated 26.08.2025 passed in Application No.2392 of 2025 in CS.No.87 of 2024.
2. The appellants before this Court are the defendants in the Civil Suit.
The suit has been instituted by the respondent herein for defamation and to pay damages. The consequential relief sought for is permanent injunction. The defendants moved an application before the learned Single Judge to remove the present managing committee of the respondent society and appoint an Administrator to manage the affairs of the respondent society pending disposal of the civil suit.
3. Learned Single Judge found that the relief sought for in the application is beyond the suit relief sought for in the plaint. That apart, the suit has been instituted for defamation and to pay damages, and in such circumstances, the defendants cannot file an application for appointment of an Administrator to run the administration of the respondent society.
4. We are in agreement with the learned Single Judge that the interim relief cannot be granted beyond the scope of the main relief sought for in the suit. That apart, the suit is for defamation and thus, the relief sought for in the application has been rightly rejected, and this Court does not find any infirmity in the order dated 26.08.2025 passed in Application No.2392 of 2025 in CS.No.87 of 2024.
5. Accordingly, the Original Side Appeal stands dismissed. No costs.
