C.R.P.(MD)No.398 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:08.04.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN C.R.P.(MD)No.398 of 2026 and C.M.P.(MD)No.1817 of 2026 1.A.Leelavathi 2.P.Easwari 3.T.Jeyasudha 4.T.Vishagan 5.T.Vignesh 6.T.Twinprabu ... Petitioners vs. 1.The Commissioner, Allinagaram Municipality, Periyakulam Road, Theni Taluk, Theni District. 2.S.Kadavul ... Respondents PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and executable order dated 19.12.2025 passed in the application in I.A.No.3 of 2025 in O.S.No.28 of 2025 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Theni and allow the same. For Petitioners : Ms.T.Shiva Shree For Mr.J.Barathan For R-1 : Mr.G.Kaleeswaran Standing Counsel For R-2 : Mr.R.Shankar Ganesh 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.(MD)No.398 of 2026 O R D E R Heard Ms.T.Shiva Shree for Mr.J.Barathan for petitioner, Mr.G.Kaleeswran, for 1st respondent and Mr.R.Shankar Ganesh for 2nd respondent. 2. This revision challenges the dismissal of an application filed to amend the plaint. 3. O.S.No.28 of 2025 has been presented for the following reliefs: m. 4>5>6 thjpfs; bgaupy; Vw;gl;Ls;s tuptpjpg;g[ vz;fs;. 125/033/901663> 125/033/901667> 125/033/901668 kw;Wk; 125/033/901669-d; go tHf;Fiur; brhj;jpw;F rk;ge;jkhd tuptpjpg;g[ vz;fis 2k;gpujpthjpf;F Mjuthf 1k; gpujpthjp uj;J bra;af;TlhJ vd epue;ju epiya[Wj;Jf; fl;lis gupfhuk; tHq;fpa[k;> M. jhth brhj;jpy; 4>5>6 thjpfs; bgahpy; Vw;gl;Ls;s thptpjpg;g[fis 2k; gpujpthjp khw;w Kaw;rp bra;tjid rK:fk; ePjpkd;wk; jLj;J epWj;jpl epue;ju epiya[Wj;Jf; fl;lis ghpfhuk; tHq;fpa[k;> ,. ,t;tHf;fpd; bryt[ bjhifia thjpfSf;F 1>2 gpujpthjpfs; brYj;jp itf;f cj;jutpl;Lk;> <. ,d;Dk; ,t;tHf;fpd; jd;ikf;Fk;> NH;epiyf;Fk; Vw;g ,ju gupfhuq;fs; tHq;fpa[k;> jPu;g;g[k;> jPu;g;ghiza[k; gpwg;gpf;f ntz;o jhH;ika[ld; gpuhu;j;jpj;Jf; bfhs;sg;gLfpwJ. 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.(MD)No.398 of 2026 4. The case of the plaintiffs is that the 1st defendant, Allinagaram Municipality had mutated the taxation records from the name of the plaintiffs to the name of the 2nd defendant without prior notice. Hence, an application in I.A.No.3 of 2025 was filed to amend the plaint to incorporate the relief of mandatory injunction and to declare that the property assessment cancellation from the plaintiff''s name and the consequent mutation in the name of the 2nd defendant are not binding on the plaintiffs. This application came to be dismissed by the Trial Court. Hence, the present revision. 5. Going through the papers, this Court was able to perceive that the grievance of the petitioners is that an attempt had been made by the 2nd respondent herein, to mutate the revenue records in his favor, on the dismissal of the suit in O.S.No.41 of 2014 on the file of District Munsif Court at Theni. An appeal is said to be pending in A.S.No.1 of 2025 before the Subordinate Court at Theni. 6. Considering the scope of the plea that the mutation of taxation records had been taken place without prior notice, I had called upon the learned Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent to state whether the plaintiffs had been put on notice prior to such mutation. The Counsel took time to get instructions. When the matter was called today, the learned Counsel reported that prior to the mutation, the 2nd defendant alone was heard and not the plaintiffs. 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.(MD)No.398 of 2026 7. The issue before the Court is whether mutation has taken place without notice or not. In case, mutation had taken place without prior notice, obviously, it is in violation of principles of natural justice and it cannot be sustained. 8. Under Order XV, Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, where there is no dispute on an issue of law or on fact, the Court is entitled to pronounce judgment in the suit, without pushing the parties for trial. What is available to the Learned District Munsif at Theni under Order XV is certainly available to this Court, while dealing with a revision. Hence, with the consent of parties, O.S.No.28 of 2025 is decreed in the following terms: (i) The mutation of taxation records from the name of the plaintiffs to the name of the 2nd defendant, pursuant to the notice dated 03.04.2025, is declared as null and void. (ii) There shall be a mandatory injunction directing the 1st defendant to issue fresh notice to both the plaintiffs and the 2nd defendant, on the basis of the request made by the 2nd defendant for cancellation of the property taxation assessment from the name of the plaintiffs to his name. (iii) The statement of the learned counsel for the 1st defendant that notice will be issued on 27.04.2026 is recorded. 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.(MD)No.398 of 2026 (iv) The 1st defendant, after receiving the objection from the plaintiffs and the 2nd respondent, shall pass appropriate orders on the request made by the 2nd defendant for mutation of taxation records by 31.05.2026. (v) The learned District Munsif is requested to record the decree granted by this Court and close the suit. 9. As the suit itself has been decreed in the aforesaid terms, this Civil Revision Petition stands closed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition stands closed. Index :Yes / No 08.04.2026 Internet :Yes / No NCC :Yes / No Nsr To: The District Munsif Court, Theni. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.R.P.(MD)No.398 of 2026 V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J. Nsr Order made in C.R.P(MD)No.398 of 2026 08.04.2026 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis