Madras High CourtCRP/4240/2018dismissed

N.Dhanalakshmi v. E.Deivathal

2024-04-01Honourable Mr Justice V. Lakshminarayanan5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 01.04.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN and C.M.P.No.23260 of 2018 1.N.Dhanalakshmi 2.Minor. N.Vignesh 3.Minor. N.Mugesh .. Petitioners (Minor petitioners 2 & 3 are represented by their mother and guardian N.Dhanalakshmi, 1st petitioner herein) Vs.

1.E.Deivathal 2.Amsaveni 3.K.Mayilathal 4.C.Easwari 5.K.Subbaya Gounder 6.K.Thangaraj 7.K.Easwaran 1/5

8.K.Sivakumar 9.V.Saraswathi 10.K.Rathinasamy 11.K.Thangavel @ Velusamy 12.V.Lakshmi 13.R.Easwari 14.K.Palaniammal 15.P.Subramani 16.P.Valarmathi 17.S.Kuppuraj 18.K.Mohan 19.M.Selvakumar 20.N.Palanisamy 21.V.Palanisamy 22.P.Rajathi 23.S.M.Thiyagarajan 24.K.N.Palanisamy 25.U.Deivasikamani 2/5

26.S.Murugesan 27.M.Rajendran .. Respondents Prayer: This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to strike off the plaint in O.S.No.213 of 2017 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharapuram, by allowing this Civil Revision Petition.

For Petitioners : Mr.N.Ponraj For RR 1 to 3 : Mr.S.Saravanan For RR 4 to 14, 16 to 17 & 19 to 27 : No appearance R15 : Died For R18 : Mr.Guru Dhananjay

O R D E R

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed to strike off the plaint in O.S.No.213 of 2017 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharapuram.

2.The learned counsel for the petitioners seeks to strike off the plaint on the ground that the suit is barred by virtue of partition in the previous 3/5

litigation in O.S.No.269 of 2006 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Dharapuram and also on the ground that the partition suit is barred by time. 3.If these pleas are open to the petitioners, they are always at liberty to move an application under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC and seek for rejection of the plaint. Being the mixed question of law and fact, I am not inclined to strike off the plaint on the ground that the suit is barred due to a previous decree. On the ground of re-litigation, leaving it open to the petitioners to move an application under Order VI Rule 16 of CPC, this revision is dismissed.

4.Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs. 01.04.2024 krk Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No : Yes / No 4/5

V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.

krk To The Additional District and Sessions Court, Dharapuram.

01.04.2024 5/5