Madras High Court
Duraisamy vs Selvi on 16 February, 2021
C.R.P.(P.D).No.3731 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 16.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
C.R.P.(P.D).No.3731 of 2016
& C.M.P.No.18925 of 2016
Duraisamy ...Petitioner
Vs.
1.Selvi
2.Karthi
3.Alamelu Ammal
4.Kannammal
5.Sekar
6.Thangamani ...Respondents
Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution
of India to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 27.04.2016made in
I.A.No.205 of 2015 in O.S.No.1 of 2011 on the file of the Principal District
Court, Dharmapuri.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Umapathi
For Respondents : Notice Served-NA
ORDER
The Civil Revision Petition is directed as against the fair and
decretal order dated 27.04.2016made in I.A.No.205 of 2015 in O.S.No.1 of
2011 on the file of the Principal District Court, Dharmapuri, thereby
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.R.P.(P.D).No.3731 of 2016
dismissed the petition to implead the petitioner as a party in the final decree
proceedings in O.S.No.1 of 2011.
2.Though notice was served to the respondents, name also printed
in the causelist, no one has entered appearance either by person or through
their counsel.
3.The petitioner is the 3rd party to the suit proceedings in
O.S.No.1 of 2011. The respondents 1 and 2 herein are the plaintiffs in the
said suit. The respondents 3 to 6 herein are the defendants in the suit filed
by the respondents 1 and 2 for partition in respect of the suit property. The
suit was decreed by Judgment and decree dated 16.11.2011. On the strength
of the decree, the parties filed the final decree proceedings and in the final
decree proceedings, an Advocate Commissioner was appointed and while he
was inspecting the suit properties, the petitioner came to understand that in
the said proceeding, his property also subjected for partition. In fact the
petitioner purchased the said property on 11.03.1996 and the same is
reflected as 5th item of the suit schedule property.
4.On the perusal of the plaint, the respondents 1 and 2 mentioned
that the said property is situated in Dharmapuri R.D, Dharmapuri Sub-R.D.,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.R.P.(P.D).No.3731 of 2016
Balajangamanahalli Revenue Village, house bearing door No.6/48, whereas
in the sale deed, they mentioned the Survey Number classified as
gramanatham, admeasuring 0.860 hectares. While an Advocate
Commissioner was appointed for division of property, in so far as the 5 th
item of the suit schedule property, he has recorded that there was a house
and also opined that it is not divisible since it has a house. Thereafter the
petitioner came to understand that the property purchased by him is also
subjected to partition. Immediately, he filed a petition to implead himself in
the final decree proceedings in O.S.No.1 of 2011, which was dismissed on
the ground that the reason described in the property mentioned in the sale
deed as well as the suit schedule property of item 5 differs. On perusal of
the Advocate Commissioner’s report, it revealed both the properties are one
and the same. Therefore, the petitioner is a necessary party to participate in
the final decree proceedings.
5.In view of the above discussion, the order dated 27.04.2016
made in I.A.No.205 of 2015 in O.S.No.1 of 2011 on the file of the Principal
District Court, Dharmapuri, is set aside.
6.Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. No costs.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.R.P.(P.D).No.3731 of 2016
Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
16.02.2021
Index:Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
Speaking Order: Yes/No
Jer
To
The Principal District Court, Dharmapuri.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.R.P.(P.D).No.3731 of 2016
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN.J,
Jer
C.R.P.(P.D).No.3731 of 2016
& C.M.P.No.18925 of 2016
16.02.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
