T.S.Rajagopal Sharma v. S.T.Ramalingam Pellai

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.10.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU 1.T.S.Rajagopal Sharma 2.Sree Vaijayanthee Samajan Charitable and Educational Trust, Representing its Managing Trustee, T.S.Rajagopal Sharma, Sree Vaijayanthee Vidhayalaya School Complex, Mangamma Nagar, Srirangam, Trichy - 6.

3.The Secretary, T.S.Rajagopal Sharma, K.N.R.Vidhyalaya, Trichy - 6.

... Petitioners/Petitioners/ Defendants Vs.

S.T.Ramalingam Pellai

...Respondent/Respondent/

Plaintiff PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to set aside the ex order and fair order in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in O.S.No.805 of 2015 C/W O.S.No.590/2020 dated 02.07.2025 on the file of the III Additional Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirappalli and allow the revision petition.

1/5

For Petitioner : M/s.N.Juliet Latha

ORDER

The present Civil Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the ex order and fair order in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in O.S.No.805 of 2015 C/W O.S.No.590/2020 dated 02.07.2025 on the file of the III Additional Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirappalli.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent has filed a suit seeking for eviction of the petitioners from the suit schedule property, to avoid damages of Rs.5,000/- per day on and from 03.07.2025 and to declare the registered rental agreement dated 18.06.2013 is sham and nominal. The petitioners have also received legal notices from a third party namely, one A.Arumugam, who claims to recover possession of the suit property from them. Hence, the said third party is also a necessary party to the suit. Therefore, the petitioners have filed an application seeking to implead the said A.Arumugam as the fourth defendant in the suit. She submits that if the said third party is not impleaded, it will only create multiplicity of proceedings. Therefore, she 2/5

submits that the said third party is a proper and necessary party to the suit and seeks the indulgence of this Court.

3. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the materials available on record.

4. It is the claim of the petitioners that the third party whom they sought to implead as the fourth defendant to the suit has also claimed a right over the property, based upon the legal notice issued by the said third party. If any third party claims a right in respect of the suit schedule property, it is for him to substantiate his right. Except for the legal notices, no other substantiative documents or evidence have been placed before this Court to contend that such third party is a proper and necessary party to the suit. The suit has been filed by the respondent against the petitioners for eviction and for damages in respect of the suit schedule property. It is also an admitted case that there has been a lease agreement between the petitioners and respondent. 3/5

5. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any infirmity in the order impugned in this civil revision petition. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. 23.10.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No sn To 1.The III Additional Subordinate Judge, Tiruchirappalli.

2.The Section Officer Vernacular Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

K.KUMARESH BABU ,J.

SN 23.10.2025 5/5