IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 19.01.2026 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR CRP.No.203 of 2026 and CMP.Nos.627 of 2026 D.Suresh Jain ... Petitioner Vs.

1.Vinod R.Doshi 2.Beena N.Doshi

3.Ravilal S.Doshi (HUF)

Represented by his Karta Vinod R.Doshi, All are residing at, No.22/53, Rukmani Road, Kalakshetra Colony, Besant Nagar, Chennai – 600 090.

...Respondents PRAYER :Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, praying to set aside the docket order dated 24.10.2025 in RLTOP.No.326 of 2025, pending on the file of XIV Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai.

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Karunakaran For Respondents :M/s.C.Uma

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the docket order dated

24.10.2025 passed in RLTOP.No.326 of 2025.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent herein filed a petition for repossession under section 21(2) (a) of Tamil Nadu Regulations of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlord and Tenant Act, 2017 against the petitioner. The said petition was resisted by the petitioner that he was not at all tenant under the respondent. In the counter affidavit, it was clearly stated by the petitioner, the respondent entered into lease agreement only with M/s.Kesar Gift Mart (P) Limited and not with the petitioner in his individual capacity. Thereafter, the respondent filed rejoinder. However, he has not taken any steps to amend the cause title. Only after examination of respondent as PW.1 on 17.10.2025, the application has been filed by the respondent in M.P.No.1 of 2025, seeking to amend the cause title, so as to, include the name of the company. On 22.04.2025, the counsel for the petitioner raised an objection with regard to the maintainability of the amendment application as the respondent failed to amend the cause title immediately after filing of counter. While granting time for filing counter, the Rent Court made the following observations:

“Respondent counsel present. Petitioner counsel present. On perusal of case records it is found that this Court has, found that the cause title of the respondent is not proper as there is no mention of the company for which he is the managing director. However, petitioner counsel stated that the numbering authority had asked them to make such retification. Respondent counsel stated that as the petitioner had already missed the bus, he cannot make any corrections and he will file a counter in that regard. But this, Court in the interest of justice is empowered to clarify as to facts on record at any stage of case for an effective and adjudication, and has acted only with in ambit of law, equity and natural justice. Hence, for further proceeding call on 31.10.2025”

3. In impugned order, the Rent Court has not decided the amendment application filed by the respondent in M.P.No.1 of 2025 on its own merits. The petitioner prayed time for filing counter and the matter was adjourned to 31.10.2025. Any passing remark made by the Rent Court will not affect the right of the petitioner. The petitioner is entitled to file his counter in M.P.No.1 of 2025 raising all the objections including the maintainability of the application at this stage. The Rent Court shall dispose of the M.P.No.1 of 2025 after giving sufficient opportunity to the petitioner and the respondent. The objection raised by the petitioner with regard to the amendment shall be considered on its own merits, without being influenced by anything mentioned in the order impugned in this revision.

4. With these clarification, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

19.01.2026 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No ub To The XIV Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai.

S.SOUNTHAR , J.

ub

19.01.2026