Mahalakshmi (Died), 1. Maheswari, M/s.N.Rahamadullah, ,P. SARAVANAKUMAR,P.Kalaiyarasi Bharathi vs Rajeswari — SA(MD)/75/2026

Case under U/s 100 of C.p.c Section 100. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED on 05th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCMD010963592025

Filing Number

SA(MD)/66616/2025

Filing Date

05-Aug-2025

Registration No

SA(MD)/75/2026

Registration Date

27-Feb-2026

Judge

Honourable Mr Justice P.B. Balaji

Coram

Honourable Mr Justice P.B. Balaji

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

Suits ( 149 )

Sub-Category

Declaration ( 3 )

Judicial Branch

Judicial Section

Decision Date

05-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISMISSED

Last updated 07-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

U/s 100 of C.p.c Section 100

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Mahalakshmi (Died), 1. Maheswari, M/s.N.Rahamadullah, ,P. SARAVANAKUMAR,P.Kalaiyarasi Bharathi

  2. 2.Jeyachitra

  3. 3.Vaijeyanthimala

  4. 4.Gayathri

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Rajeswari

    Adv. T.ARUNGANESH,K.KAVIARASAN FOR R1 (IN SR STAGE),M/S.GOVERNMENT PLEADER ,FOR R2 DT 26/03/2026 USR12421 1123

  2. 2.The Sub Registrar,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-Jun-2026

    Honourable Mr Justice P.B. BalajiView PDF

    Case Summary: SA(MD) No.75/2026 Court Decision: The Madras High Court dismissed the second appeal and upheld the First Appellate Court's dismissal of the plaintiff's suit. Key Facts: Sisters Mahalakshmi (plaintiff) and Rajeswari (defendant) disputed a settlement deed dated 16.07.2007. Plaintiff claimed the illiterate defendant fraudulently obtained her signature under the pretext of patta mutation, transferring valuable properties. Defendant countered that plaintiff voluntarily executed the deed. Reasoning: The court found the plaintiff failed to prove fraud or misrepresentation. Witness testimony confirmed voluntary execution before the Sub Registrar, who affirmed proper registration procedures. The plaintiff's 10-year delay in challenging the deed (discovered only during house renovation in 2016, sued April 2017) undermined credibility. The court rejected the illiteracy argument, noting plaintiff signed the document with her husband present and obtained certified copies, distinguishing this case from precedent requiring thumb impressions alone. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Apr-2026

    Final Hearing Cases

    Honourable Mr Justice P.B. Balaji

  4. 08-Apr-2026

    Final Hearing Cases

    Honourable Mr Justice P.B. Balaji

  5. 27-Mar-2026

    XxX

    Honourable Mr Justice P.B. Balaji

  6. 05-Mar-2026

    For Admission

    Honourable Mr Justice P.B. Balaji

  7. 03-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 05-Aug-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. SA(MD)/75/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: SA(MD) No.75/2026 Court Decision: The Madras High Court dismissed the second appeal and upheld the First Appellate Court's dismissal of the plaintiff's suit. Key Facts: Sisters Mahalakshmi (plaintiff) and Rajeswari (defendant) disputed a settlement deed dated 16.07.2007. Plaintiff claimed the illiterate defendant fraudulently obtained her signature under the pretext of patta mutation, transferring valuable properties. Defendant countered that plaintiff voluntarily executed the deed. Reasoning: The court found the plaintiff failed to prove fraud or misrepresentation. Witness testimony confirmed voluntary execution before the Sub Registrar, who affirmed proper registration procedures. The plaintiff's 10-year delay in challenging the deed (discovered only during house renovation in 2016, sued April 2017) undermined credibility. The court rejected the illiteracy argument, noting plaintiff signed the document with her husband present and obtained certified copies, distinguishing this case from precedent requiring thumb impressions alone. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case