Selvi Alias Kalaiselvi v. Kannaiyan Alias Gopalakrishnan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI CRP No. 1172 of 2026 & CMP.No.5975 of 2026

1. SELVI alias KALAISELVI W/o Ramakrishnan K.Vallagundapuram Village, Kodingiyam Post, Udumalpet Taluk.

2. C.Karthikeyan S/o Chinnasamy, Old D.No.2, New D.No.8, V.K.R.Garden, B.S.Sundaram Road, Tiruppur District 638 601 ..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. KANNAIYAN Alias GOPALAKRISHNAN S/o Ramasamy Gounder D.No.7/122, K.Vallagundapuram Village, Udumalpet Taluk, Tiruppur District.

2. Ramakrishnan S/o Narayasamy Gounder K.Vallagundapuram Village, Udumalpet Taluk Tiruppur District ..Respondent(s)

Prayer : Civil Revision Petitioner filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India to set aside the order dated 9.7.2025 made in IA.No. 1581/2023 in OS.No. 384/2014 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Udumalpet. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.Gokul S

ORDER

Challenging the impugned Order passed by the trial Court in I.A.No.1581 of 2023 in O.S.No.384 of 2014, this Civil Revision Petition has been preferred by the proposed parties to the suit.

2. The plaintiff had filed the suit for declaration of his 1⁄2 share in the suit property and consequential injunction against the defendant. Pending suit, the plaintiff has filed an application before the trial Court to implead the petitioners in the suit stating that the defendant had executed a settlement deed in the respect of a portion of the suit property in favour of the petitioners and hence, they are proper and necessary party to the suit. The said application has been opposed by the defendant and the petitioners stating that the details of the aforesaid transactions have been stated by the defendant during his examination and that the petition has been filed only to prolong the suit proceedings. The trial Court, considering the submissions on either, allowed the application. Challenging the same present revision has been filed by the proposed parties.

3. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the plaintiff has belatedly come forward with the application to the implead them in the suit and hence, seeks to set aside the Order of the trial Court.

4. A perusal of records reveal that the plaintiff had filed the suit for declaration of title in respect of his 1⁄2 share in the suit property. As the defendant had settled a portion of the suit property to the petitioners in year 2011 and the petitioners are claiming right over the property, to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, the trial Court had allowed the application and hence, the Order of the trial Court needs no interference. The revision petitioners are granted liberty to raise all their defence before the trial Court and the trial Court is directed to proceed with the suit after impleading the petitioners in the suit.

5. With the above directions, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 10-03-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order vrc

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

vrc 10-03-2026