Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 48463

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Abdul Quddhose, J
Devarajan – Appellant
Versus
Jayalakshmi – Respondent
C.R.P.No.3084 of 2026

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: N.S.Suganthan
For the Respondents: Notice dispensed with

A revision petition against an interlocutory order becomes infructuous when the main suit is subsequently decreed and the petitioner has opted to challenge the decree through a regular appeal.

Headnote:The Civil Revision Petition challenged the trial court's order dismissing an application under O.IX R.7 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to set aside an ex-parte order. Subsequent to the filing of the petition, the suit was decreed, and the petitioner preferred an appeal in A.S.No.89 of 2026 where an interim stay was obtained. The core issue is whether a revision petition challenging the refusal to set aside an ex-parte order remains maintainable once the suit has been subsequently decreed. The Court determined that since an appeal against the decree is pending with an interim stay, the revision application has become infructuous. The Court dismissed the Revision Petition as infructuous, granting the petitioner liberty to raise all available grounds in the pending appeal.

Table of Content
1. subsequent developments in the trial court render interlocutory revision petitions infructuous. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)

Prayer :
Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, praying to set aside the Fair and Final Orders dated 30.07.2025 made in I.A.No.2 of 2025 in O.S.No.202 of 2017 on the file of the learned I Additional District Court, Erode by allowing this Civil Revision Petition.

*****

ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition has been filed challenging the impugned order, dated 30.07.2025 passed by the I Additional District Court, Erode in I.A.No.2 of 2025 in O.S.No.202 of 2017.

2. The aforesaid order has been passed by the trial court, dismissing the application filed by the petitioners under Order IX Rule 7 CPC seeking to set aside the exparte order. It is now brought to the notice of this Court by the learned counsel for the petitioners that, subsequent to the filing of this revision, the trial court had decreed the suit on 09.09.2025 and aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have preferred the first appeal in A.S.No.89 of 2026 on the file of this Court and had also obtained an order of interim stay of the decree passed by the trial court in O.S.No.202 of 2017 on 16.02.2026.

3. In view of the subsequent developments, the prayer sought in this revision has now become infructuous. After recording the fact that the petitioners are having the benefit of interim stay of operation of the decree passed in O.S.No.202 of 2017 on the file of I Additional District Court, Erode, in A.S.No.89 of 2026, by an order of this Court, dated 16.02.2026, which is subsequent to the filing of this revision, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of as infructuous by granting liberty to the petitioners to raise all grounds available to the petitioners under law in A.S.No.89 of 2026, pending on the file of this Court. No costs.

Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

08.06.2026

Index : Yes / No
Speaking order / Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No
sp

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 48463

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASAbdul Quddhose, JDevarajan – AppellantVersusJayalakshmi – RespondentC.R.P.No.3084 of 2026

A revision petition against an interlocutory order becomes infructuous when the main suit is subsequently decreed and the petitioner has opted to challenge the decree through a regular appeal.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Abdul Quddhose, J
Devarajan – Appellant
Versus
Jayalakshmi – Respondent
C.R.P.No.3084 of 2026