Thevar Mahajana Sangam Mathoor v. Srila Sri Alagusundara

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 24.02.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI C.R.P.(MD).No.411 of 2016(PD) and C.M.P.(MD).No.1789 of 2016 Thevar Mahajana Sangam Mathoor Maharajapuram (Post) Srivilliputtur Taluk Virudhunagar District its present Administrators 1.A.Sundaram @ Sundarasamy 2.V.Ganesan 3.N.Sudhakar 4.N.Ganesan 5.A.Ganesan ... Petitioners/Defendants Vs.

Srila Sri Alagusundara Vellaichamy Swamigal Ninaivalaya Trust through its Trustees 1.R.Rajaguru 2.S.Alagu 3.M.Jothi 4.S.Satkhi ... Respondents Prayer:

Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the fair and decretal order passed in I.A.No.876 of 2015 in O.S.No.225 of 2014 on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Srivilliputtur dated 18.11.2015. For Petitioners :Mr.M.Ashokkumar

ORDER

The plaintiffs are the defendants and the respondents are the plaintiffs in the suit. The respondents filed a suit in O.S.No.225 of 2014 for declaration that the sale deed dated 05.10.1989 executed by one Natarajan S/o.Veerakumarathevar in favor of the Mathoor Kirama Thevar Magajana Sangam is null and void and to cancel the same.

2.The petitioner filed written statement on 09.10.2014. The petitioner filed I.A.No.876 of 2015 for rejection of plaint under Order 7 Rule 1 of C.P.C in the month of July 2015. The respondent https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

filed counter affidavit and resisted the same. 3.The learned Judge, after considering the facts and materials on record, dismissed the application. Against the said dismissal order, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed. 4.The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the learned Judge did not consider the reasons given by the petitioner for the rejection of plaint and dismissed the said application. The learned Judge failed to see that there is no cause of action for filing the suit and the same is barred by limitation. The respondents have filed the suit only as trustees and the petitioners have been shown as office bearers of the Sangam and therefore, they ought to have filed the suit before the District Court. The documents filed by the respondents clearly show that there is no movable and immovable property belonging to the Trust. 5.Heard Mr.M.Ashokkumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and I have carefully perused the entire materials on record.

6.The petitioners filed petition in I.A.No.876 of 2015. The Consideration for rejection of plaint filed under Order 7 Rule 1 of C.P.C is only based on the averments made in the plaint. The objection of the petitioners in the written statement or an application are not reasons for the rejection of the plaint. In the present case, the petitioners have raised 9 grounds for rejection of the plaint. The learned Judge, considered each and every grounds and rejected the same by giving valid reasons. The learned Judge has considered the I.A in proper perspective and exercised his jurisdiction properly. Therefore there is no illegality and irregularity in the said order, which does not warrant any interference by this Court.

7.In the result, the civil revision petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(W) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar Ns To The Principal District Munsif, Srivilliputtur. +one cc to M/s.M.Ashokkumar, Advocate in SR.NO.10817 C.R.P.(MD).No.411 of 2016(PD) and C.M.P.(MD).No.1789 of 2016 24.02.2016 CSL/NGM-SS/22.03.2016/2p/3c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/