Madras High CourtCRP/1516/2016disposed of

N. Ganesan v. G. Dharmasivam

2016-06-13Honourable Mr Justice C. T. Selvam4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 13.06.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM Civil Revision Petition (PD) Nos.1516 & 1628 of 2016 1.N.Ganesan 2.N.Murugesan 3.N.Dakshinamoorthy 4.A.P.Mohan 5.A.P.Arunachalam 6.A.P.Sadasivam 7.S.Annamalai ... Petitioners in both CRPs vs G.Dharmasivam ... Respondent in both cases Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the orders of learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Perundurai, passed in I.A.Nos.81 and 82 of 2015 in O.S.No.40 of 2013 on 10.03.2016.

For Petitioners :

Mr.A.Sundaravadhanan For Respondent :

Mr.M.Guruprasad ***** C O M M O N O R D E R These revisions challenge the orders of learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Perundurai, passed in I.A.Nos.81 and 82 of 2015 in O.S.No.40 of 2013 on 10.03.2016.

3. The respondent/plaintiff moved O.S.No.40 of 2013 seeking reliefs of declaration and injunction. Pursuant to the filing of the written statement, the respondent/plaintiff moved I.A.No.81 of 2015 for amendment of the plaint and 82 of 2015 for permission to file a reply statement. Both applications have been allowed on the reasoning that the same do not in any manner alter the nature of the suit and allow such applications would avoid multiplicity of proceedings.

It is the concern of the learned counsel for petitioner that while not interfere to the amended plaint. He would be entitled to file an additional written statement. There is no direction of the Court below permitting him to file a reply statement to the he may not be permit to the rejoinder to the loss made in I.A.No.... with a observation of both IAS informed that they intended one and the same .. The petitioner would be entitled to file as state .... In filing of rejoinder affidavit to the I.A. Would leave of no effect. The rejoinder to the reply statement it would all be entitile to file additional similarly the petitioner would also be entitled to file a rejoinder to the reply statement filed.

Accordingly, these Civil Revision petitions are dismissed. No Costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 13.06.2016

Index:yes/no Internet:yes To The VI Assistant City Civil Judge, Chennai, C.T.SELVAM, J kpr Civil Revision Petition (PD) Nos.1270 & 1271 of 2016

13.06.2016