V.Srinivasa Raghavan v. Arulmigu Adivaraga Perumal Tirukovil
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06-03-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R. POORNIMA CMP(MD) No.19849 of 2025 in SA(MD)No.89 of 2004 1.V.Srinivasa Raghavan 2.P.V.Vasantha Krishnan (Died) Petitioner(s) Vs.
1.Arulmigu Adivaraga Perumal Tirukovil Puthur, Trichy - 17, rep. By its Executive Officer 2.Sridhar 3.Amirthavalli 4.Hemalatha 5.Narayanan 6.Revathi Respondent(s) 1/3
For Petitioner(s): Mr.G.Kandhavadivelan for Mr.S.Ramesh @ Ramaiah For Respondent(s): Mr.J.Bharathan - for R1 & R2 No appearance - for R3 Prayer : to permit the petitioner to bring on record the other legal representatives of the deceased 2nd appellant, cited as the respondents 4 to 6 and to rank them as respondents 4 to 6 in the main appeal.
ORDER
This application has been filed to bring on record the other legal representatives of the deceased 2nd appellant, cited as the respondents 4 to 6 and to rank them as respondents 4 to 6 in the main appeal.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant stated that the 2nd appellant died and he wants to bring on record the legal heirs of the 2nd respondent, for which the learned counsel for the 1st respondent temple seriously objected by stating that the suit was filed by the appellants 1 and 2 who are allegedly in possession of the suit property claiming injunction that was dismissed. Against which first appeal filed which was also dismissed. The 2nd appellant is the father of the 1st appellant. Now, in the 2/3
second appeal one of the appellants who claim possession is already on record and the other legal heirs who are not in possession cannot claim to be in possession of the property, though they are claimed as legal heirs. 3.Taking into consideration of the objection made by the 1st respondent it shows that the proposed respondents 4 to 6 are admittedly not residing in the suit property and therefore, they are not necessary party and they are not in possession of the property and therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed.
4. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Registry is directed to list the second appeal for final hearing on 12.03.2026. 06-03-2026 rm 3/3