Madras High CourtCRP(MD)/894/2018dismissed

Ananthakrishnan, v. Sonaimuthammal

2018-08-07Honourable Mr Justice G.R.Swaminathan2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.08.2018

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN C.R.P.(PD)(MD).No.894 of 2018 and C.M.P.(MD)No.3965 of 2018 Ananthakrishnan ... Petitioner Vs.

1.Sonaimuthammal 2.Muthusami 3.Executive Officer ... Respondents Selection Grade Town Panchayat, Manamadurai, Sivagangai District.

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to allow the CRP by setting aside the fair and decreetal order made in I.A.no.573 of 2017 in O.S.No.206 of 2013 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Manamadurai, dated 20.03.2018.

For petitioner : Mr.A.Sivaji For R1 & R2 : Mr.J.Ramesh for Mr.V.Raghavachari For R3 : Mr.G.Muthukannan

O R D E R

*********** The respondents 1 and 2 herein filed O.S.No.206 of 2013 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Manamadurai, seeking declaratory relief regarding a pathway right and for removal of a parapet wall constructed by the defendant Town Panchayat. The suit was filed in August, 2013. It appears that after the trial commenced and progressed to some extent, the revision petitioner herein filed I.A.No.573 of 2017 for impleading himself in the suit proceedings. The learned Principal District Munsif, Manamadurai, by the impugned order dated 20.03.2018 dismissed the I.A. The said order is assailed in this Civil Revision Petition.

2. Heard the learned counsel on either side.

3. This Court is of the view that the suit property has nothing to do with the property of the revision petitioner herein. As pointed out by the Court below, the defendant Town Panchayat is actively contesting the claim raised by the respondents 1 and 2 herein. The trial has progressed substantially. The revision https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

petitioner has filed I.A.No.573 of 2017 for impleading himself, 4 years and 4 months after the institution of the suit. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the learned Principal District Munsif, Manamadurai, was justified in dismissing the petition for impleading the revision petitioner. The reasons assigned by the Court below are very much sustainable in law. The question of impleading the party in the suit proceedings will arise, only when it can be shown that in the absence of the person who is proposed to be impleaded, there cannot be proper adjudication. Such is not a case here. For all the reasons assigned by the Court below, the order impugned in this Civil Revision Petition is sustained.

4. Since the revision petitioner is not a party to the suit proceedings, it goes without saying that the legal rights of the revision petitioner cannot be, in any way, impaired by the outcome of the said suit.

5. With these observations, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(crl side) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-I) To:

1. The Principal District Munsif, Manamadurai.

2. The Record Keeper,(2 copies) VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

+1cc to Mr.V.Raghavachari, Advocate Sr.No.77805 PNN VB/RP/SAR1/01.10.2018/2P/5C ORDER MADE IN C.R.P.(PD)(MD).No.894 of 2018 and C.M.P.(MD)No.3965 of 2018 07.08.2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/