BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 24/02/2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SENTHILKUMAR CMP(MD).No.1717 of 2026 Mr. D. Karthikeyan ... Petitioner Vs Mr. V. Thiruvenkadam ... Respondent PRAYER :- Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the order dated 17-09-2025 made in I.A.No.2 of 2025 in OS.No.346 of 2016 on the file of the learned Additional District Munsif, Lalgudi.

For Petitioner : Ms. K. Vidya Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.S.B. Kayvin Prince ORDER This Civil Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the order dated 17.09.2025 passed in I.A. No. 2 of 2025 in O.S. No. 346 of 2016 on the file of the learned Additional District Munsif, Lalgudi.

2. The present revision is directed against the order of the trial Court permitting the respondent to mark certain revenue documents through the Village Administrative Officer.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner submitted that the documents sought to be marked, namely Chitta, Patta and Adangal relating to Survey No. 167/1, are public documents. It is his contention that such documents can be marked only by producing certified copies obtained from the competent authority. He further submitted that as per Rule 76 of the Civil Rules of Practice, the party must first apply for certified copies before the competent authority and only upon refusal, appropriate steps can be taken. According to him, without exhausting such procedure, the respondent cannot seek to mark the documents through the Village Administrative Officer. It is also submitted that the said aspect was not properly considered by the trial Court.

4. This Court has considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

5. It is not in dispute that the documents sought to be marked are public documents. As per the settled principles of law, public documents are to be proved in the manner known to law, ordinarily by producing certified copies issued by the competent authority. The procedure contemplated under the Civil Rules of Practice also requires the party to take steps to obtain such certified copies.

6. In the present case, there is nothing on record to show that the respondent had made any attempt to obtain certified copies of the said documents from the competent authority or that such request was refused. In the absence of compliance with the prescribed procedure, the trial Court ought not to have permitted the marking of such documents through the Village Administrative Officer.

7. However, considering the nature of the documents and in order to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order at this stage.

8. At the same time, it is made clear that the respondent is at liberty to obtain certified copies of the said public documents in accordance with law and mark the same through appropriate witnesses during the course of trial.

9. With the above observations, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequenlty, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

24.02.2026 TRP Index : yes/ no Internet : yes / no TO The Additional District Munsif, Lalgudi.

N. SENTHILKUMAR,J TRP CMP(MD).No.1717 of 2026 Date : 24/02/2026