CRP(PD).No.1621 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 21.04.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA CRP.(PD).No.1621 of 2025 and CMP.No. 9393 of 2025 1.Mrs.K.J.Benazir Jahan Rep. by her power of attorney Mr.Zahir Hussain 2.Mr.Zahir Hussain ... Petitioners Vs. Mrs.Roshan Jahan ... Respondent Prayer:- Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to allow the Civil Revision Petition, thereby setting aside the order dated 28.02.2025 in IA.No.5/2023 in OS.No.9084/2022 on the file of Hon'ble XVII Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai. For Petitioner : M/s.G.Mohammed Aseef O R D E R Challenging the dismissal of their application to reject the plaint in OS.No.3084/2022 on the file of the XVII Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai, the defendants are the petitioners before this Court. 1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP(PD).No.1621 of 2025 2. The short facts are as follows:- 3. The respondent/plaintiff had filed the afore-said suit seeking an injunction restraining the defendants, their men, agents, servants from interfering with her peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property. The suit property is a house, ground and premises situate at Plot No.32, Door Np.24, 1st Cross Street Karpagam Avenue, Chennai – 600028. 4. It is the case of the respondent/plaintiff that she is the elder sister of the 1st petitioner/1st defendant and the 2nd petitioner/ 2nd defendant is the husband of the 1st petitioner/ 1st defendant. The respondent/plaintiff's father had purchased the properties at Chennai as well as at Koothanallur, Tiruvarur District. The respondent/plaintiff's mother also hailed from a respectable family and inherited properties from his parents. The respondent/plaintiff, the 1st petitioner/ 1st defendant and their brother K.J.Nizamuddin were provided with good education. The respondent/plaintiff is presently residing at Hong Kong with her husband who is employed there. 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP(PD).No.1621 of 2025 However, she frequently travels to India and stays at Koothanallur along with her mother or at Chennai at her husband's house which is the suit schedule property. 5. The respondent/plaintiff would submit that their parents had gifted certain properties orally to her by way of Hiba. The respondent/plaintiff had also accepted the Hiba and taken possession of the same. The property at T.Nagar, Chennai and other properties were settled in favour of the respondent/plaintiff and the 1st petitioner/1st defendant by way of a registered settlement deed executed by the respondent/plaintiff's parents. The parents however reserved their life interest in the said properties. The respondent/plaintiff's father had passed away on 17.09.2020 and her mother is still in the enjoyment of the usufruct of the properties. The respondent/plaintiff would submit that her mother is not keeping good health and since she is not taken care of by the 1st petitioner/1st defendant, the respondent/plaintiff has been frequently travelling to India. The respondent/plaintiff would submit that after the demise of her father, the 1st petitioner/ 1st defendant started to concentrate on 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP(PD).No.1621 of 2025 liquidating the family properties into funds to appease the 2nd respondent/2nd defendant who is the husband of the 1st petitioner /1st defendant. The respondent/plaintiff had refused to liquidate the family properties. Thereafter, the 1st petitioner/1st defendant on the instigation of the 2nd petitioner/2nd defendant had started foisting false and frivolous cases against the respondent/plaintiff. 6. The respondent/plaintiff would submit that she is currently not being permitted to meet her mother, and the petitioners/defendants forcibly broke open the house in Koothanallur and took away the respondent/plaintiff's personal belongings which were stored there. The petitioner/plaintiff would submit that the dispute with reference to the property and its right has to be contested before the Court having proper jurisdiction. The petitioner/plaintiff would submit that if the defendants claim a share in the property they must take steps to prove their title and obtain portion of the properties. However, without doing so they are attempting to interfere with the respondent/plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property. Therefore, the suit. 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP(PD).No.1621 of 2025 7. The petitioners/defendants on entering appearance had filed IA.No.5 of 2023 to reject the plaint on the ground that there is no cause of action for filing the suit. 8. The respondent/plaintiff had filed a counter by stating that no grounds whatsoever has been raised by the petitioners/defendants for rejecting the plaint. That apart, the suit property belongs to the plaintiff's husband and is not the property of the plaintiff's parents. 9. The learned XVII Additional City Civil Court, Chennai by his order dated 28.02.2025 was pleased to dismiss the said application. Challenging the same, the petitioners are before this Court. 10. The only ground on which the application for rejecting the plaint has been filed is that there is no cause of action for filing the suit. However, a plain reading of the plaint clearly sets out a cause of action. That apart in para no.7, of the plaint the respondent/plaintiff has set out how the petitioners/defendants are attempting to threaten her into giving her consent for partition of the properties while their 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP(PD).No.1621 of 2025 mother was still alive. This Court as well as the Hon’ble Apex Court had time and again held that while considering the application for rejecting the plaint, the Court should only look at the contents of the plaint and confirm as to whether the pleadings make out a cause of action. In the instant case, the respondent/plaintiff has in very great detail set out the reasons and the cause of action for filing the suit in question. Therefore the order passed by the learned XVII Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai cannot be found fault with. 11. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 21.04.2025 (shr) Index : Yes/No Speaking Order: Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No To 1.The XVII Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai. 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP(PD).No.1621 of 2025 P.T. ASHA . J., (shr) CRP.(PD).No.1621 of 2025 and CMP.No. 9393 of 2025 21.04.2025 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis