Madras High CourtCRP(MD)/558/2017disposed of

Sri Devi Amma v. Pathara Pillayar, Siva,

2017-03-17Honourable Dr Justice G. Jayachandran2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.03.2017 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN C.R.P.(NPD)(MD)No.558 of 2017 and C.M.P.(MD) No.2554 of 2017

1. Sri Devi Amma

2. Krishna Prasad

3. Krishnaveni

4. Krishna Kumar

5. Krishna Priya ... Petitioners vs.

1. Pathara Pillayar, Siva, Ayyappa, Kunnangal Bhagavathy & Nagayekshi Covil Private family Turst Rep.

By its Secretary Harikrisnan Thambi.

2. The Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowment Department, (Administration), Chennai -34.

3. The Assistant Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowment (Administration), Nagercoil, Agastheeswarn Taluk,Kanyakumari District.

4. The Deputy Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowment (Administration), Tirunelveli and District

5. Sathishkumar ... Respondents Prayer : The Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to dispose the application in I.A.No.418 of 2016 in I.A.No.226 of 2007 in O.S.No.104 of 1999 on the file of the Sub Court, Padmanabhapuram.

For Petitioners : Mr.A.Rajkumarsen

O R D E R

The Civil Revision Petition is filed to dispose of the application in I.A.No.418 of 2016 in I.A.No.226 of 2007 in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

O.S.No.104 of 1999 on the file of the Sub Court, Padmanabhapuram.

2. The revision petitioners have filed an application I.A.No.418 of 2016 to provide correct decreetal order passed in I.A.No.226 of 2007. According to the revision petitioners, one Harikrishnan Thampi was impleaded as sixth respondent vide order passed in I.A.No.866 of 2012 dated 21.12.2012. In the decreetal order, the said Harikrishnan Thampi name is omitted, whereas in the fair order, is known as sixth respondent. Therefore, they have taken out an application to carry out the amendment and provide the corrected copy of fair order and decreetal order.

3. The contention of the revision petitioners is that the trial Court has not furnished the fair order and decreetal order after carrying out the necessary amendment as prayed in the application.

4. This Court, while perusing the application filed by the revision petitioners seeking corrected copy of the fair order and decreetal order, finds that the revision petitioners have sought corrected copy deleting the name of Harikrishnan Thampi. The contention of the revision petitioners is that Harikrishnan Thampi name has been wrongly impleaded and shown as 6th respondent, which is not factually correct probably that may be the reason why the trial Court has not consider their application. Therefore, it is suffice to direct the revision petitioners to make an appropriate application and get corrected copy of fair order and decreetal order. Accordingly, the revision petition is disposed of. sd/ Assistant Registrar(AD II) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To The Sub-Judge, Padmanabhapuram, Kanyakumari District.

+1CC TO M/S.A.RAJKUMARSEN, Advocate,SR.NO.15541 C.R.P.(NPD)(MD)No.558 of 2017 17.03.2017 JM/SV MMS/17.03.2017/2P/3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/