Madras High CourtCRP/1532/2014dismissed

Malarjothi v. Makudeswaramoorthy

2017-02-24Honourable Mr Justice S.M. Subramaniam5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 24.02.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM C.R.P (PD).No.1532 of 2014 and M.P.No.1 of 2014 1.Malarjothi 2.Mekala ... Petitioners Vs.

1.Makundeswaramoorthy Periannagounder (Deceased) 2.Chandrasekaramoorthy 3.Balasubramaniamoorthy 4.V.Sathasivam 5.Vijay Jain ... Respondents Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 21.02.2014 passed in I.A.No.1028 of 2013 in O.S.No.184 of 2010 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Perundurai, Erode District.

For Petitioners : Mr.S.Dhanasekaran - no appearance For Respondents : Mr.Naveen Kumar Murthi for Ms.P.T.Ramadevi (R1)

O R D E R

The present revision petition is filed by the defendants 4 & 5, who are the revision petitioners and the suit in O.S.No.184 of 2010 was filed for partition.

2.During the pendency of the suit, an application was filed seeking permission of the Court to file an additional written statement. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the respondent contended that there was a memo filed by the revision petitioner stating that the written statement filed by the 6th defendant shall be adopted as far as the defendants 4 & 5 are concerned. When they have filed a memo specifically adopting the written statement filed by the 6th defendant, the trial Court found that additional written statement is not required. This apart, the suit was filed in the year 2008 and the application was filed after a lapse of six years from the date of filing of the suit. The examination of the witnesses on the side of the plaintiff were completed and therefore, by allowing this petition, it will prolong the suit and further, the revision petitioners have filed the petition only with an intention to protract the issue and to prolong the suit. Hence, the findings of the trial Court is in accordance with law and there is no infirmity in the order.

4.Accordingly, the order passed in I.A.No.1028 of 2013 in O.S.No.184 of 2010 dated 21.02.2014 is confirmed. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition in C.R.P.(PD).No.1532 of 2014 is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Index : Yes 24.02.2017 Internet : Yes va To The Subordinate Court, Perundurai, Erode District.

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM , J.

va C.R.P (PD).No.1532 of 2014 and M.P.No.1 of 2014 24.02.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in