Chakrapani Kounder v. Chellammal

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 20.09.2019 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY C.R.P.(NPD).No.2980 of 2013 and M.P.No.1 of 2013 Chakrapani Kounder ... Petitioner v.

Shanmugha Kounder (died)

1. Chellammal

2. Annammal

3. Yashodhai

4. Kanniyappan

5. Elumalai

6. Ramayee

7. Saradha

8. Palani

9. Poorani

10. Valli

11. Aiyappan

12. Uma

13. Ganesan ... Respondents Page 1 / 5

Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code against the order and decree dated 06.06.2013 made in I.A.No.91 of 2012 in A.S.No.5 of 2011 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Villupuram.

For Petitioner : Mr. G. Rajan For Respondents : Mrs. Kavitha Balakrishnan - for R1 to R4 No Appearance - for R5, R6 & R9 to R11 R7, R8 & R12 - Not Ready in Notice R13 - Died

ORDER

Challenging the order passed in I.A.No.91 of 2012 in A.S.No.5 of 2011 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Villupuram, the 2nd defendant in O.S.No.165 of 2008 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Court, Villupuram, has filed the above Civil Revision Petition.

2. The plaintiffs filed the suit in O.S.No.165 of 2008 for partition and for other reliefs. The Trial Court, dismissed the suit. Page 2 / 5

3. Against which, the defendants preferred an appeal in A.S.No.5 of 2011 on the file of the Principal District Court, Villupuram. In the said appeal, the plaintiff filed an application in I.A.No.91 of 2012 to implead the proposed parties as the respondents 3 to 10. The defendants filed their counter and contested the application.

4. The Lower Appellate Court, taking into consideration the case of both the parties and also finding that the proposed parties are necessary parties, allowed the application. Against which, the 2nd defendant has filed the above Civil Revision Petition.

5. On a careful consideration of the order passed by the Lower Appellate court, it could be seen that the Lower Appellate Court has categorically found that the proposed parties are proper and necessary parties for proper adjudication of the suit for partition. The Lower Appellate Court, while allowing the application for impleading, has given categorical finding. The reasoning given by the Lower Appellate Court are just and proper.

Page 3 / 5

6. In these circumstances, I do not find any error or irregularity in the order passed by the Trial Court. The Civil Revision Petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

20.09.2019 Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non Speaking Order Rj To The Principal District Judge, Villupuram.

Page 4 / 5

M.DURAISWAMY, J.

Rj C.R.P.(NPD)No.2980 of 2013 and M.P.No.1 of 2013 20.09.2019 Page 5 / 5