IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B. Balaji, J
C. Manokaran – Appellant
Versus
S. Easwaran – Respondent
Civil Revision Petition O.S.SR.No.889 of 2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. failure to represent the plaint renders a challenge to its return premature. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. court directs the petitioner to represent the matter to the trial court to determine pecuniary jurisdiction. (Para 4 , 5) |
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. The petitioner is the plaintiff, aggrieved by the learned Principal District Judge refusing to number the plaint on the ground that the suit valuation is less than Rs.1 lakh. The learned counsel counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the prayers sought for in the suit and stated that the Court of competent jurisdiction is only the Principal District Judge.
3. However, I find that though the plaint has been returned on 28.04.2026, without even representing the same, complying with the returns, the plaintiff has rushed to this Court by way of this revision.
4. In the light of the above, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of with the following directions:
i) The Registry shall return the original plaint to the learned counsel for the petitioner within a period of two weeks from today to enable the petitioner/plaintiff to represent the plaint before the learned Principal District Judge, within a period of two weeks thereafter.
ii) The learned Principal District Judge shall hear the learned counsel for the petitioner in open Court on the maintainability with regard to the pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Court and thereafter pass orders on maintainability within a period of four weeks thereafter.
5. With the above directions, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.