T.Thevarasan v. N.Ganapathy

C.M.P.No.19091 of 2025 in S.A.No.494 of 2019 C.M.P.No.19091 of 2025 in S.A.No.494 of 2019 K.RAJASEKAR, J., This petition has been filed by the appellant to implead the Sub Registrar Joint II, South Chennai as the 3rd respondent and the Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Combined Commercial Tax and Registration Department as the 4th respondent in the above Second Appeal on the ground that a Settlement deed was registered in favour of one G.Susila by the contesting respondent dated 29.01.2016.

2.According to the petitioner, this registered document is fraudulent document, and therefore, the proposed respondents are necessary parties.

3. I am not inclined to accept this contention since it is an admitted fact that the petitioner has already filed C.M.P.No.22073/2025 stating that the contesting respondent, namely Ganapathy had no issues. However, the written statement file by Ganapathy reveals that Ganapathy was living with his wife, G.Susila. It has also been established before this Court that G.Susila has since no more. In view of the same, the petitioner himself has filed C.M.P.No.22073/2025 seeking to implead the Administrative General and Official Trustee of Tamil Nadu (AG & OT) as the proposed respondent. 1/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.P.No.19091 of 2025 in S.A.No.494 of 2019 K.RAJASEKAR,J., ssi

4. That being the case, impleading the proposed parties from the Registration Department, who merely performed their statutory duty of registering the document, is unnecessary, as they are not essential for deciding the issues involved in this Second Appeal.

5. Accordingly, this Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. 11.09.2025 (2/3) ssi C.M.P.No.19091 of 2025 in S.A.No.494 of 2019 2/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis