Bagavathi v. Dhiraviya Thevar,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 14.09.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN C.R.P.(MD).No.2666 of 2016 and C.M.P.(MD)No.12518 of 2016

1. Bagavathi

2. Velammal

3. Subbiah

4. Murugan

5. Selvam

6. Puthumai Lakshmi ... Petitioners/Proposed party Respondents 37 to 42 Vs.

1. Dhiraviya Thevar(Died) Perumal Thevar(Died) Paramasivam (Died)

2. Lakshmi

3. Ramakrishnan

4. Mani

5. Thamilarasi

6. Mahakrishnan @ Muthiah

7. Sundaravel @ Chandran

8. Thoppiah

9. Narayana Thevar 10.N.E.P.C.Milson Company Ltd., 36, Wallajah Road, Chennai.

11. Sathyamoorthy, Managing Director, Sudharson Spinning Mills Ltd., 128, Bhavani Raod, Erode.

12. Palanichamy Muthammal (died)

13. Vijaya

14. Paul

15. Vellapandi

16. Subbammal

17. Subbiah

18. Lakshmi

19. Ganesan

20. Sankarammal

21. Paramasivam

22. Nalarajan

23. Thayammal

24. Saraswathi

25. Ponnammal

26. Lakshmi

27. Subbiah

28. Madakkan

29. Kosalai

30. Esakkiappan

31. Vetrivel

32. Muthukrishnan

33. Andiappan

34. Rajakala ... Respondents/Defendants PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to allow the Civil Revision petition by directing the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Boodhapandi to number the I.A. of 2016 SR.No.1521(a) filed to implead the legal heirs of the second defendant in I.A.No.177 of 2012 in O.S.No.292 of 2012.

For Petitioners : Mr.M.Md.Ibrahim Ali For R-1 : C.Dhanaseelan For R-2 to R-5, R-10 R-16, R-17, R-22, R-25, R-26, R-29 & R-31 to R-34 : No appearance.

***

O R D E R

O.S.No.120 of 1996 on the file of the learned II Additional District Munsif, Nagercoil, was filed by one Thiraviya Thevar, seeking the relief of partition and separate possession. The said Thiraviya Thevar was shown as the second defendant in the said suit. It appears that he was set ex-parte on 05.03.1996. Preliminary decree came to be passed. Thereafter, final decree was also passed on 23.08.2016. The grievance of the Revision petitioners is that the said Paramasivam Thevar died on 08.10.2015 and that therefore, the decree passed against him should be construed as nullity. They had filed an application for setting aside the ex-parte decree made in the final decree proceedings. They filed a petition to condone the delay. But then, the Court bellow declined to number the said application. Aggrieved by the same, this Civil Revision petition has been filed.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondents pointed out that the said Paramasivam Thevar remained ex-parte, even at the preliminary decree stage. But then, it is true that the preliminary decree was passed on 21.04.2004. The question is whether the said Paramasivam Thevar was set ex-parte in the final

decree also. But the learned counsel on either side are unable to furnish the exact details. Be that as it may, there can be no impediment for numbering the said interlocutory application filed by the Revision petitioners herein and giving a disposal in accordance with law.

3. Therefore, this Court directs the learned District Munsif, Boothapandi, to number the Interlocutory application filed by the Revision petitioners, if it is otherwise in order and dispose of the same on merits.

4. The Civil Revision petition stands allowed, accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/ Assistant Registrar(AD-II) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar (CS-I) To The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Boodhapandi C.R.P.(MD).No.2666 of 2016 and C.M.P.(MD)No.12518 of 2016 14.09.2018 pmu KK/RSK/SAR-1/27.10.2018/3P-2C