Palanisamy v. Chinnammal @ Indragandhi

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 02.08.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and C.M.P.(MD)No.17363 of 2023 Palanisamy ... Petitioner/3rd Respondent/3rd Defendant vs.

1.Chinnammal @ Indragandhi ... 1st Respondent/Petitioner/Plaintiff 2.Anjalai 3.Sivapakkiyam 4.Muthukannu 5.Pambaiya Udayar 6.P.T.Sebasthiyan 7.Sesumary ... Respondents 2 to 7/Respondents 1, 2 and 4 to 7/ Defendants 1, 2 and 4 to 7 Prayer:- Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the order and decreetal order passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Pudukottai in I.A.No.156 of 2021 in O.S.No.75 of 2016, dated 26.06.2023.

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Kamesh For Respondents : No Appearance for R1, R3, R5 to R7 Mr.P.Pandiarajan for R2 & R4 1/4

ORDER

The Civil Revision Petition is filed aggrieved by the order dated 26.06.2023 made in I.A.No.156 of 2021 in O.S.No.75 of 2016 on the file of the learned Additional District Judge, Pudukottai. 2.By the said order, the application filed by the plaintiff to direct the defendants to begin the case, has been allowed by the trial Court. The suit is one for partition. The plaintiff seeks for partition and separate possession of the share. The defendants are contesting the suit stating that already oral partition had taken place and as a matter of fact, pursuant to the oral partition, the plaintiff has sold the properties allotted to him also. The other grounds of defence are also taken. In that scenario, when the plaintiff filed the application, the trial Court has allowed the same.

on some additional facts alleged by the defendant the plaintiff is not entitled to any part of the relief which he seeks, in which case the defendant has the right to begin."

3.Therefore, it can be clear that normally, it is for the plaintiffs to begin the case. It is only under the circumstances, where the defendants admits the facts alleged by the plaintiff and contends either on a point of law or on some additional facts alleged by the defendants, the plaintiff is not entitled to any part of the relief, which he seeks the defendant has to begin. In this case, the defendants are not admitting the facts alleged by the plaintiff and the dispute is on facts also.

4.In view thereof, the order passed by the trial Court is unsustainable and the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. I.A.No.156 of 2021 in O.S.No.75 of 2016, on the file of the learned Additional District Judge, Pudukottai, shall stand dismissed. The trial Court shall proceed with the suit further. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

02.08.2024 NCC : Yes sji 3/4

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

sji To The Additional District Judge, Pudukottai.

02.08.2024 4/4