Z. Balkis Jakar v. S. Nazeem Banu@Nazeem Ahamed
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 09.10.2020
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.2177 of 2015 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2015 1.Z.Balkis Jakar 2.Z.Abdul Rahim 3.Z.Jameel Waris ... Petitioners/Respondents 1-3 /Defendants 1 to 3 vs.
1.S.Nazeem Banu @ Nazeem Ahamed 2.S.Rajeek Bareeth 3.S.Niyara Ahamed 4.K.P.Duyamani 5.C.A.Peros Ahamed 6.C.A.Sahapudeedn Ahamed 7.M.Jainulapudeen 8.Z.Bias Mohamed 9.Z.Abeeth Assam 10.Z.Ammattur Rakmani Sabika 11.S.Sahul Hammed 12.Farithul Hammed 13.C.A.Suraiya Begum 14.C.A.Raffieeka Begum
15. The Sub Registrar, Cumbum Town, Theni District.
16. The District Registrar, South Agraharam, Periyakulam Town and Taluk, Theni District.
17. The District Collector, Theni District, Theni.
...Respondents/Respondents 4-17
/Defendants 4-17 (RR 1,3,9,10,12 & 14 Dismissed vide Court Order dated 08.11.2019) 1/3
PRAYER: The Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the fair order dated 09.06.2015 made in I.A.No.223 of 2013 in O.S.No.41 of 2011 on the file of the Sub Court, Uthamapalayam.
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Vijayakumar For R6 & R11 : Mr.Mohamed Ibram Saibu for M/s.Ajmal Associates For RR15, 16 &17 : Mr.K.Sathiyasingh Additional Government Pleader For R4 & R2 : No Appearance
ORDER
The present petition is filed by the defendants 1 to 3 challenging the order made in I.A.No.223 of 2013, which the plaintiffs have filed for amending plaint.
2. The suit is laid for declaration of title, for a decree directing cancellation of registration of some document, for mandatory injunction of removal of a gate in the compound wall etc., A Commissioner has been appointed at the instance of the plaintiff and the Commissioner appeared to have filed his report. Thereafter, the plaintiff has filed I.A.No.223 of 2013 for amending the plaint on the allegation that since filing of the suit, certain subsequent events have taken place and wanted to introduce the same in the suit. The defendants 1 to 3 / revision petitioners herein contested it. But the trial Court had allowed the said application.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the records.
4. The plaintiff had filed a petition for amendment contending that since filing of the suit, taking advantage of the absence of the plaintiff from the suit property, the defendants have taken possession. The defendants would contend even in the written statement that they are in possession of the suit property. The trial Court however, has allowed the amendment application.
5. Whether the plaintiff was in possession at the time, when the suit was laid or whether there is any subsequent events adding to the cause of action or whether the contentions of the defendants that they are in possession even as on the date of the suit are all matters for trial. Therefore, this Court does not find any impropriety or irregularity in the approach of the trial Court. However, if the relief is bared by limitation for whatever reason, the trial Court may have to address it at the time of dismissal of the suit.
2/3
6. Subject to the last mentioned observation herein above, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-III) // True Copy // / /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) ta/msa To The Subordinate Judge, Uthamapalayam.
Copy to:
1.The Sub Registrar, Cumbum Town, Theni District.
2.The District Registrar, South Agraharam, Periyakulam Town and Taluk, Theni District.
3.The District Collector, Theni District, Theni.
C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.2177 of 2015 09.10.2020 SRK(CO) CS(21.10.2020) 3P 5C 3/3