SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 3099

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr.Justice S. SOUNTHAR
B.ELUMALAI – Appellant
Versus
M.K.KRISHNAN – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20-01-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SOUNTHAR CRP No. 188 of 2026 and CMP.No.792 of 2026

1. B.Elumalai 2. B.Annamal

3. Kanniammal ..Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. M.K.Krishnan

2. M.K.Manivannan

3. N.Vajiravel

4. V.Vetrichelvan ..Respondent(s)

Prayer : Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the order passed by learned Principal Sub-Judge, Madurantakam in I.A.No.02/2025 in OS No. 13/2002 dated 08.10.2025 and also direct him to impound the document Ex-A1.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.U.Madhanagopalan for Mr.V.Umapathy

ORDER

The civil revision petition is filed challenging the order passed by the Trial Court dismissing the application filed by the petitioners seeking to impound the document which was already marked as Ex.A1.

2. The respondents 1 and 2 filed a suit for declaration of title and injunction. The document dated 13.11.2002 was already admitted in evidence as Ex.A1. Thereafter, the present application has been filed by the petitioners seeking to impound the same on the ground that it was insufficiently stamped document. The Trial Court, by relying on Section 36 of Stamp Act, rightly dismissed the application. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have come before this Court.

3. It is settled law that once an insufficiently stamped document is admitted in evidence without any objection by the other side, thereafter, the opposite party cannot question the admission on the ground of insufficient stamping of the document. In fact, the Trial Court relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Javer Chand and Others Vs Pukhraj Surana reported in AIR 1961 SC 1655. Hence, I do not find any error in the order passed by the Trial Court. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

20-01-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No nr S.SOUNTHAR, J.

nr To The Principal Sub-Judge, Madurantakam.

CRP No. 188 of 2026 and CMP.No.792 of 2026

20-01-2026

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top