R. SRIVIDYA vs SATYALAKSHMI ALIAS LAKSHMI
- Court
- Madras High Court
C.R.P.No.4303 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11-11-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
Civil Revision Petition No.4303 of 2024
CNR: {HCMA011862582024}
R.Srividya
W/o.Sivakumar
..Petitioner
Vs
1. Satyalakshmi alias Lakshmi
W/o.Late.C.Ramada
2. R.Balamurugan
S/o.Late.C.Ramadas
3. M/s.Karpagam Jewellers,
represented by Partner,
R.Balamurugan,
No.491, Cross Cut Road,
Gandhipuram, Coimbatore.
..Respondents
Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India
against the order passed by the I Additional District Court, Coimbatore, dated
05.06.2024 in I.A.No.16 of 2023 in O.S.No.672 of 2020.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ramakrishnan
For Respondents : Mr.S.Srivatsa
*
ORDER
This civil revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India against the order dated 05.06.2024 passed in I.A.No.16 of
2023 in O.S.No.672 of 2020 by the I Additional District Court, Coimbatore,
wherein the application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff to refer the matter to the
__________
Page1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/11/2026 03:02:59 pm )
C.R.P.No.4303 of 2024
High Court to initiate contempt proceedings against the respondents, came to be
dismissed by the Court below.
2. Heard learned counsel on either side and carefully perused the
materials available on record. This Court also went through the impugned order.
3. The petitioner is the plaintiff, who filed the suit in O.S.No.672 of 2020
th
seeking the relief of partition and for allotment of 5/16 share in item Nos.1 to 7
th
and 1/4 share in item No.8 and for other consequential reliefs. The petitioner
filed I.A.No.2 of 2020 in O.S.No.672 of 2020 for an injunction restraining the
respondents/defendants from encumbering or alienating the suit properties
pending disposal of the suit and I.A.No.3 of 2020 in O.S.No.672 of 2020 for
appointment of receiver. I.A.No.2 of 2020 in O.S.No.672 of 2020 came to be
partly allowed by the Court below by order dated 15.03.2022 with regard to
Item Nos.2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8.
4. The application for appointment of receiver was necessitated with
respect to item Nos.1 and 4 of the suit property on the ground that the second
respondent/second defendant was indulging in acts of waste, misfeasance and
malfeasance and that a receiver must be appointed to take charge and control of
Karpagam Abarna Maligai and Karpagam Jewellers. This application filed in
I.A.No.3 of 2020 in O.S.No.672 of 2020 came to be partly allowed by the Court
__________
Page2 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/11/2026 03:02:59 pm )
C.R.P.No.4303 of 2024
below in the following terms:
“In the result this petition stands partly allowed with the
following observations:-
1) the petitioner Srividhya and the 1st respondent Sathyalakshmi @
Lakshmi are hereby appointed as Receivers to take charge and
control of Karpagam Abarna Maligai and manage the same.
2) the Receivers so appointed shall maintain the accounts of the day-
to-day activities of the business and should submit the account
particulars every four months before this Court till the disposal of
the suit.
3) the Registry is directed to call for the list of Panel Auditors from the
Institute of Chartered Accountant, Coimbatore and after obtaining
the particulars, an Auditor will be appointed to help and assist the
Receivers in maintaining the accounts.
4) the Receivers are responsible for any loss occasioned to the
property by their willful default or gross negligence.
th
5) As regards to the 4 item Karpagam Jewellers, the same to be
nd
managed by the 2 respondent but the account particulars to be
furnished to this Court once in 4 months till the disposal of the suit.
6) The Receivers shall carry and continue with the development work
in the said business.
7) the Receivers are entitled to a remuneration of Rs.25,000/- each out
of the profit of the business and the same to be properly accounted.
8) the Receivers shall maintain proper account of the business with the
help of the Auditor, who is to be appointed.
9) the remuneration of the Auditor is fixed at Rs.15,000/- per month,
subject to ratification by this Court as and when any request is made
for additional remuneration by the Auditor.
10) Both parties are at liberty to approach this Court for any
clarification or further direction in executing the duties of the
Receivers.
th
11) As regard the prayer for appointing Receiver to the 4 item, the
petition stands dismissed.
12) For procuring name list of Auditor's from the Institute of Chartered
Accountant by the Registry. Call on 23.03.2022.”
__________
Page3 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/11/2026 03:02:59 pm )
C.R.P.No.4303 of 2024
5. After the appointment of the receiver, a memo came to be filed before
the Court below seeking certain clarifications. The said memo was considered
by the Court below and an order was passed on 29.07.2022 in the following
terms:
So it is hereby ordered to send communication to Indian overseas
bank to recognize the petitioner as a Court appointed receiver and
permit her to operate the bank account of Karpagam Abarna Maligai
maintained in the said bank.
Coming to her claim to confer her the power to draw cheques for the
Karpagam Aparna Maligai, this Court is of the view that she cannot
be granted unilateral cheque drawing power. As per the order she has
to necessarily manage the concern alongwith her mother. Hence the
Banks are hereby directed that fresh cheque books are to be given to
Karpagam Aparna Maligai with cheque drawing powers collectively
to the petitioner and the 1st respondent. The cheque book in use is to
st
be returned to the bank. The 1 respondent shall file an affidavit that
no cheque leaves of the earlier cheque books of Karpagam Aparna
Maligai issued by the above said banks are retained by her.
st
Considering the Authority given to the petitioner and the 1
respondent as receivers in I.A.No.3 of 2020 the GST portal has to be
st
necessarily operated by them hence 1 respondent is directed to sign
necessary application by including the name of the petitioner as a
Receiver to operate GST portal.
With respect to the drawer keys of the office table of Karpagam
st
Aparna Maligai the 1 respondent is permitted to keep the Keys but a
duplicate is to be given to the petitioner. The parties are directed to
ensure that except the two set of keys no other key is used.
All the fixed deposits and investments of Karpagam Aparna Maligai
are to be handed over to the Auditors for safe custody and a list of the
st
same is to be filed before this Court by the 1 respondent. If any
amount is to be taken from the fixed deposits or investments for the
developments of the business a permission is to be obtained from this
Court. This Memo is recorded accordingly.”
__________
Page4 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/11/2026 03:02:59 pm )
C.R.P.No.4303 of 2024
6. I.A.No.16 of 2023 in I.A.No.3 of 2020 in O.S.No.672 of 2020 came to
be filed before the Court below to refer the matter to the High Court to initiate
contempt proceedings against the respondents on the ground that there was a
gross violation of the order passed by the Court and in spite of the interim order
passed, the first respondent redeemed all the mutual funds and the fixed
deposits amounting to Rs.6.50 crores as nominee and she has credited the
proceeds in her account initially and subsequently, transferred the same to the
account of respondents 2 and 3. There was also suppression of accounts and
therefore, contempt proceedings must be initiated against them for violating the
order passed by the Court below in I.A.No.3 of 2020 in O.S.No.672 of 2020.
7. The Court below, after considering the rival contentions, came to a
conclusion that the order passed by the Court below has not been violated and
consequently, the petition was dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the present
revision has been filed before this Court.
8. The main ground urged before this Court is that the Court below
directed respondents to hand over all the fixed deposits and investments of
Karpagam Maligai to the auditors for safe custody, whereas this direction was
not complied with. Apart from that, mutual funds and fixed deposits were
redeemed by the first respondent and it has been transferred to the account of
respondents 2 and 3 and the same was done without getting permission of the
Court.
__________
Page5 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/11/2026 03:02:59 pm )
C.R.P.No.4303 of 2024
9. On carefully going through the order passed by the Court below, it is
seen that the Court below has recorded the fact that the direction was issued in
I.A.No.3 of 2020 in O.S.No.672 of 2020 based on the memo dated 10.06.2022
only to deposit the fixed deposits and investments of Karpagam Maligai, which
is entirely different from item No.8 of the suit property. No specific direction
was issued insofar as item No.8 of the suit property is concerned. Apart from
that, the first respondent has only received the amount in her capacity as a
nominee and has also admitted that the petitioner also has a share and she is
ready to provide the accounts for the amount received by her as a nominee.
10. The Court below is the best Judge to understand the scope of the order
passed and consider whether the order passed has been violated. The Court
below, on proper understanding of the order, came to a conclusion that the order
passed has not been violated. Such finding rendered by the Court below cannot
be subjected to interference merely on the ground that this Court could arrive at
a different conclusion on the scope of the order. That exercise will be beyond
the power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
11. Learned counsel for petitioner placed before this Court certain
materials to substantiate as to how the respondents have violated the order
passed by the Court below. These materials were gathered recently and the
Court below did not have the advantage of looking into these materials.
__________
Page6 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/11/2026 03:02:59 pm )
C.R.P.No.4303 of 2024
Therefore, this Court, for the first time, cannot assess those materials while
testing the order passed by the Court below.
12. In the light of the above discussion, the impugned order is sustained.
It is left open to the petitioner to file a fresh application seeking
modification/clarification of the earlier orders based on the materials gathered
by the petitioner and the same shall be considered by the Court below on its
own merits and in accordance with law after granting opportunity to all parties
concerned within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of filing of the fresh
application by the petitioner.
In the result, this civil revision petition is disposed of in the above terms.
No costs.
11-11-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
gm
To
The I Additional District Court,
Coimbatore.
__________
Page7 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/11/2026 03:02:59 pm )
C.R.P.No.4303 of 2024
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.
gm
Civil Revision Petition No.4303 of 2024
11-11-2026
__________
Page8 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/11/2026 03:02:59 pm )