Mahalingam v. Chelladurai

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.07.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI C.R.P.(MD)No.528 of 2022 and C.M.P.(MD)No.2306 of 2022 1.Mahalingam 2.Latha 3.Saraswathi

...Petitioners

Vs.

1.Chelladurai 2.k.janakirammokan 3.K.Chandrababu 4.S.Ravindranath 5.Ashadevi 6.Geetha kannammal 7.Mythili 8.Latha Maheswari 9.Banumathi Suresh Chandra 10.S.kalpanadevi 11.S.Kiruthikadevi 12.S.Saravana Rajesh 13.Parameswari 14.R.Thilakrajkumar 15.R.Deepakrajkumar 16.Muthujanaki 17.Meena 18.S.Ramkumar 19.S.Venkatraj 20.Rani

...Respondents

1/6

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, praying to setting aside the Fair Order and Decreetal Order passed in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in O.S.No.75 of 2017 dated 06.12.2021, on the file of the IV Additional District Court, Tirunelveli.

For Petitioners : Mr.S.Meenkashi Sundaram Senior Counsel for Mr.M.Sengu Vijay For Respondent No.1 : Mr.C.Susi Kumar For Respondents 2 to 20 : No Appearance

O R D E R

This petition has been filed seeking to set aside the order passed in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in O.S.No.75 of 2017 dated 06.12.2021, on the file of the IV Additional District Court, Tirunelveli.

2.Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are only printed respondents at the instance of the plaintiff through I.A.No.1 of 2019. Challenging the same, this Civil Revision Petition has been filed.

2/6

3.However, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are the subsequent purchasers and the vendors of the petitioners are already on record in the suit and that they would take care of the interest of the suit. Hence, the petitioners need not be impleaded. However, the petitioners were impleaded as party defendants in the suit, which is not sustainable. Accordingly, he prays for appropriate orders. 4.Per contra, learned Counsel for the respondents would submit that in the absence of any interim order by this Court, the petitioners / defendants 20 to 22 have already filed their written statements before the trial Court and the trial is in progress. At this stage, setting aside the order impugned order will create another confusion. Hence, he prays for dismissal of this Civil Revision Petition. 5.

The facts in the present case are not in dispute. Admittedly, the petitioners are the subsequent purchasers and they have been impleaded only at the instance of the plaintiff. Moreover, the vendors of the petitioners are already on record as defendants in the suit. Though the respondents have objected the I.A.No.1 of 2019, it is an admitted fact that they have filed their written statements in the suit.

written statements in the suit, seeking to set aside the said order of impleadment at this point of time will not serve any purpose. The petitioners themselves have agreed to contest the suit by filing written statements. Accordingly, this Court does not find any reason to set aside the order passed by the trial Court. 6.Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

07.07.2025 Internet:Yes/No Index:Yes/No MR 4/6

To 1.The IV Additional District Court, Tirunelveli.

2.The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

M.DHANDAPANI , J.

MR C.R.P.(MD)No.528 of 2022 07.07.2025 6/6