logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide

24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 MHC 7154 print Preview print Next print
Court : Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
Case No : AS.(MD). SR. No. 48484 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. VADAMALAI
Parties : Ravichandran & Another Versus M. Indhirani & Others
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioners: S. Velrajan, Advocate. For the Respondents: ------.
Date of Judgment : 30-09-2026
Head Note :-
Civil Procedure Code - Section 96 r/w Order 41 Rule 1, Rule 2 -
Summary :-
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Section 96 r/w Order 41 Rule 1 & 2 of CPC, 1908
- Civil Procedure Code (CPC) – Section 96
- Section 13A of the Tamil Nadu Civil Courts and Chennai City Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 2003
- Section 13 of the Tamil Nadu City Civil Courts Act

2. Catch Words:
- Appeal
- Maintainability
- Jurisdiction
- Pecuniary jurisdiction
- Second appeal

3. Summary:
The appellant filed a first appeal before the Madras High Court against a decree of a Subordinate Court, invoking Section 96 of the CPC. The Registry objected, questioning the forum of filing. The counsel relied on Section 13A of the Tamil Nadu Civil Courts (Amendment) Act, 2003, arguing that the High Court retained jurisdiction. The Court examined Section 13A in conjunction with Section 96 CPC and held that, post‑amendment, appeals from Subordinate Court decrees must lie before the District Court. Citing precedent (A.S.No.436 of 2011, Nanjathal v. Venkittamal), the Court affirmed that the High Court lacks jurisdiction. Consequently, the appeal was returned to the appellant with directions to re‑file before the Theni District Court within the stipulated time.

4. Conclusion:
Appeal Dismissed
Judgment :-

(Prayer: This Appeal Suit is filed under Section 96 r/w Order 41 Rule 1 & 2 of CPC, 1908, to set aside the preliminary judgment and decree dated 23.03.2026 passed in O.S.No.157 of 2024 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Bodinayakanur, Theni District.)

1. This First Appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 23.03.2026 passed in O.S.No.157 of 2024 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Bodinayakanur, Theni District.

2. The Registry has returned the appeal by way of check slip, raising the following objection:

                     “It may be stated as to how the Appeal Suit is filed as against judgment and decree passed by the Sub Court, since appeal provision is available before the Lower Appellate Court as per Section 96 of CPC.”

3. The learned counsel for the appellants represented the appeal with the following endorsement in the aforesaid check slip.

                     “I have filed the first Appeal before this Hon’ble High Court. The appeal was only numbered in A.S(MD)No.333 of 2026 dated 17.07.2026. Thereafter the Registry returned the appeal in filing No.48484 of 2026 with an endorsement stating that the appeal has to be filed before the competent District Court.

                     It is respectfully submitted that notwithstanding section 13A of the Tamil Nadu Civil Courts and Chennai City Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 2003 which enlarged the pecuniary jurisdiction of the District court, at the same time, Section 13 of the Tamil Nadu City Civil Courts act continues to remain in force and provides that an appeal from a decree of the Sub Court may be lie before his Hon’ble High Court.

                     In such circumstances, it is humbly prayed that the Registry may be pleased to place the appeal before this Hon’ble Court for orders on the question of maintainability instead of returning the appeal and thus render justice”.

4. Hence, the Registry has placed the appeal under the caption ‘for maintainability’, and the same has been taken up for hearing today.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and perused the records.

6. Section 13A of the Tamil Nadu Civil Courts and the Chennai Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 2003 reads thus:

                     ''Sec.13A:Appeals from decrees of Subordinate Courts.

                     Appeals from the decrees and orders of Subordinate Judges, if passed on or after the date of the commencement of the Tamil Nadu Civil Courts and the Chennai Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 2003 shall, when such appeals are allowed by the law, lie to the District Court.

                     Appeals from decrees of District Munsif - Appeals from the decrees and orders of District Munsifs, Subordinate Judges, if passed on or after the date of the commencement of the Tamil Nadu Civil Courts and the Chennai Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 2003 shall, when such appeals are allowed by the law, lie to the Subordinate Court''.

7. As per Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code, the first appeal is to be filed before the authorized Court to hear the appeals from the decision of the trial Court.

8. A careful perusal of Section 13A of the Tamil Nadu Civil Courts and the Chennai Civil Court (Amendment) Act, 2003 r/w Section 96 of CPC, it is very clear that the appeal suit against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Court will lie only before the jurisdictional District Court and will not lie before this Court. Further, the Principal Seat of the Madras High Court has addressed the same issue of this nature in A.S.No.436 of 2011 in Nanjathal /v/ Venkittamal case and clearly held that after insertion of Section 13A of the Tamil Nadu Civil Courts and Chennai Civil Court Act, 2003, the appeal suit against the judgment and decree passed by the Subordinate Court is not maintainable before this Court and the appeal has to be filed before the District Court.

9. Admittedly, this appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 23.03.2026 passed in O.S.No.157 of 2024 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Bodinayakanur, Theni District. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the appeal will not lie before this Court and the same has to be filed before the District Court, Theni.

10. Section 13A of the Tamil Nadu Civil Courts and the Chennai City Civil Court Act have been brought under amendment for reducing pendency of appeals before the High Court by allowing the litigants to file an appeal before the District Court, by shifting jurisdiction from the High Court. Moreover, in case such a first appeal is entertained by this Court, the litigant will lose the statutory Forum of a Second Appeal. Therefore, considering the above facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that this first appeal before this Court is not maintainable.

11. Hence, this appeal is returned with liberty to file the same before the District Court, Theni. The Registry is directed to return the material appeal records to the appellants within 10 days. On getting return, the appellants are directed to file the same within four weeks. If the appeal is filed within four weeks, the learned District Judge, Theni, is directed to take the appeal on file if it is otherwise in order, without insisting for a petition to condone delay, if any.

 
  CDJLawJournal