BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 06.02.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR and CMP(MD) No.1248 of 2026

1.S.Jeyaraj

2.K.Ulaganan

3.R.Subbiah Muthuramalingam (died) ... Petitioners Vs

1.Baskara Sethupathy

2.Muthu Kazhuvan Raju Thevar (died)

Suntha Thevar (died) ... Respondents PRAYER :-Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 25.11.2025 passed in IA No.2 of 2025 in OS No.293 of 2009 on the file of the District Munsif, Thirumangalam.

For Petitioners : Mr.Arun Kumar

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed challenging the order dated 25.11.2025 made in I.A.No.2 of 2025 in O.S.No.293 of 2009 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Tirumangalam.

2.The petitioners/plaintiffs have filed a suit in O.S.No.293 of

2009 before the District Munsif Court, Tirumangalam, seeking the relief of declaration along with other reliefs. Pending suit, the petitioners have filed an application in I.A.No.2 of 2025 under Section 75 of the CPC, to summon the Tahsildar, Thirumangalam, to produce the revenue documents, like 'A' Register, Adangal etc., The said application was dismissed on 25.11.2025. Challenging the same, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the revenue documents pertaining to Ponnamangalam Village are vital and necessary for the adjudication of the dispute. The petitioners are unable to produce the said records independently, as they are maintained in the custody of the Tahsildar, being public documents within the meaning of the Indian Evidence Act.

4.He would further submit that under Order XVI Rule 1 and Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the Court is empowered to summon any person to produce documents necessary for deciding the issues involved in the suit. The Tahsildar, being the competent authority and custodian of such records, is the proper person to be summoned. Hence, he prays for appropriate orders.

5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the records. Since no adverse order is going to be passed against the respondents, notice to the respondents is dispensed with.

6.Admittedly, the petitioners filed O.S.No.293 of 2009 for declaration and pending such suit, they filed I.A.No.2 of 2025 to summon the Tahsildar, Thirumangalam, for production of revenue records. The said application was dismissed and the same is under challenge before this Court.

7.The only short point that arises for consideration by this Court is, whether the Tahsildar is liable to be summoned for production of such revenue records?.

8.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and from the perusal of papers as well as the order passed by the Court below, this Court finds that the revenue documents, which are sought to be produced by summoning the Tahsildar, are readily available in the public domain. This Court is of the view that such records, including A-register, Chitta, Adangal and other relevant extracts, can be obtained by the petitioners through established online portals or from the concerned Revenue Authorities without necessitating the summoning of the concerned Tahsildar. When the documents are easily accessible, invoking the provisions under Order XVI of the Code of Civil Procedure to summon a public official is unwarranted and would only result in unnecessary delay in the proceedings. The Court below has rightly exercised its discretion in rejecting the petition filed for summoning the Tahsildar.

9.In fine, finding no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the Court below, the Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Speaking : Yes / No 06.02.2026 NCC : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No To The District Munsif, Thirumangalam N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.

mm

06.02.2026