Madras High CourtCMP(MD)/2816/2022dismissed

T.Kumaraguru v. J.Vignesh

2023-02-14Honourable Mr Justice R.Vijayakumar2 pages

CMP(MD) No.2816 of 2022 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Fourteenth day of February Two Thousand and Twenty Three PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.VIJAYAKUMAR CMP(MD) No.2816 of 2022 AND CRP(MD) No.255 of 2021 T.KUMARAGURU ... PETITIONER/PETITIONER Vs 1 J.VIGNESH ... 1st RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT 2 THE TAHSILDAR TALUK OFFICE, SRIVILLIPUTHUR, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

3 THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER SRIVILLIPUTHUR PANCHAYAT UNION OFFICE, SRIVILLIPUTHUR TOWN VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

4 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.

VIRUDHUNAGAR.

... RESPONDENTS 2-4/ PROPOSED RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4 Petition filed praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court may be pleased to IMPLEAD the proposed respondents 2 to 4 as respondents 2 to 4 in the present Civil Revision Petition in CRP(MD) No. 255 of 2021, on the file of this Honourable Court.

Prayer in CRP(MD). 255/ 2021 :

Pleased to set aside the order passed by the learned Additional Subordinate Court, Srivilliputhur in IA No.493 of 2018 in OS No.165 of 2017, dated 07.01.2020.

ORDER : This petition coming up for orders on this day, upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/2

CMP(MD) No.2816 of 2022 upon hearing the arguments of Mr.M.SOLAISAMY, Advocate for the petitioner and of Mr.C.BASKARAN, Government Advocate on behalf of the Respondents No.2 to 4, the court made the following order:- The present civil miscellaneous petition has been filed to implead the defendants 2 and 4 in the suit in O.S.No.165 of 2017 as party to this revision petition.

2. The present revision petition has been filed by the first defendant challenging an order passed in an application, in which, the request of the petitioner for rejection of plaint was dismissed. In I.A.No.493 of 2018, which was filed under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the revision petitioner has not impleaded the other defendants namely the revenue authorities on the ground that they are not necessary parties. Now, in the revision petition, the petitioner seeks to implead them again.

3. This Court finds that they are not necessary party and in their absence, the plea relating to rejection of plaint can be considered.

4. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Petition stands dismissed.

sd/- 14/02/2023 / TRUE COPY / /02/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

RMK TO THE ADDITIONAL SUBORDINATE JUDGE, SRIVILLIPUTHUR.

ORDER IN CMP(MD) No.2816 of 2022 AND CRP(MD) No.255 of 2021 Date :14/02/2023 SA/BUC/SAR.3/21.02.2023/2P/2C https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/2