Madras High Court
L.Muruganantham vs D.Karthikeyan on 22 October, 2021
CRP.No.2269 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22.10.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN
C.R.P.No.2269 of 2021
and
C.M.P.Nos.17234 & 17235 of 2021
1.L.Muruganantham
2.L.Sumithra Devi ... Petitioners
-Vs.-
1.D.Karthikeyan
2.K.Padmavathy
3.R.Dhandapani ... Respondents
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against
the order dated 24th September 2021 passed in TROP.No.69/2021 on the file of
the Principal District Judge, Tiruppur.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Shankar
ORDER
This Petition is filed challenging the order passed in Tr.O.P.No.69/2021
passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Tiruppur on 24.09.2021.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP.No.2269 of 2021
2.Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that O.S.No.58 of 2005
was filed by one Ms.Sumithradevi against one Ms.K.Padmavathy and
Mr.R.Dhandapani, seeking relief of specific performance of contract on the
basis of sale agreement dated 19.01.1998. O.S.No.233 of 2021 was filed by
one Mr.Karthikeyan against one Mr.L.Muruganantham, the 1st Petitioner herein
for the relief of partition of suit property into two shares and allot one such
share to Mr.Karthikeyan. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the
Petitioner that the property in both the Suits is one and the same and there is
only one property. Plaintiff in O.S.No.233 of 2021 viz., Mr.Karthikeyan is the
son of the 2nd defendant viz., Mr.R.Dhandapani in O.S.No.58 of 2005. The
defendant in O.S.No.233 of 2021 viz., L.Muruganantham is the son of
Ms.Sumithradevi, who is the Plaintiff in O.S.No.58 of 2005. When the Suit in
O.S.No.58 of 2005 is pending, Mr.Karthikeyan filed a Suit for partition in
O.S.No.233 of 2021 viz., suppressing the fact that O.S.No.58 of 2005 is
pending. Since the property in both the Suits is one and the same and the
parties are closely related to each other, both the Suits have to be tried together
to avoid conflict judgments. Therefore, Tr.OP.No.69 of 2021 was filed.
However, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the
learned Principal District Judge, Tiruppur has not considered the merits of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP.No.2269 of 2021
Petitioners' claim and dismissed the Petition. Challenging the said order, this
Civil Revision Petition is filed.
3.The reading of the order of the learned Principal District Judge,
Tiruppur in Tr.O.P.No.69 of 2021, dated 24.09.2021 shows that Suit in
O.S.No.58 of 2005 was filed in the year 2005 on the basis of sale agreement
dated 19.01.1998. This case is pending for cross examination of PW1.
Pending suit, the Petitioner therein viz., Sumithradevi had allowed the suit to be
dismissed for default and later the same was restored. Suit in O.S.No.233 of
2021 was filed for partition. An application for rejection of plaint in
O.S.No.233 of 2021 is pending. It is the duty of the Petitioner to prove his
readiness and willingness and enforceability of the agreement before the trial
Court in the Suit for specific performance. It is also observed that at this stage,
especially when the Suit for specific performance is pending for 16 years,
Petitioner cannot seek for joint trail of Suit in O.S.No.233 of 2021 for the
reason that issues which are to be decided in both the cases are not the same
issues. Not only that, the parties are different and the cause of action for both
the Suit is different and relief sought for is also different. With these
observations, the learned Principal District Judge, Tiruppur dismissed the
Tr.OP.No.69 of 2021.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP.No.2269 of 2021
4.Consideration of the materials and submission of the learned counsel
for the Petitioner show that the Suit for specific performance in O.S.No.58 of
2005 was filed in the year 2005 and it is pending. Partition Suit in O.S.No.233
of 2021 was filed in the year 2021. Admittedly, the parties in the partition suit
are not the same parties in the specific performance suit. The Suit property in
both the cases is one and the same, but the parties in both the Suit are different,
relief sought for in both the Suit are different and the cause of action for filing
both the Suit are different. Top it all, Suit for specific performance in
O.S.No.58 of 2005 was filed in the year 2005. If Suits are tried together, it will
further delay the progress of O.S.No.58 of 2005 as the relief sought in
O.S.No.58 of 2005 is only for specific performance. In the Partition Suit,
preliminary decree has to be passed and then final decree has to be passed. It
will consume lot of time for finally disposing both the suits. In the interest of
justice and on the merits of case, this Court is of the considered view that joint
trial of both cases is not feasible and not necessary. The learned Principal
District Judge, Tiruppur, considering all these aspects dismissed the
Tr.OP.No.69 of 2021 and this Court finds no reason to interfere with the order
of the learned Principal District Judge, Tiruppur passed in Tr.OP.No.69 of 2021
on 24.09.2021.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP.No.2269 of 2021
5.Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
22.10.2021
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
sai
To
The learned Principal District Judge,
Tiruppur
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRP.No.2269 of 2021
G.CHANDRASEKHARAN,J.
sai
C.R.P.No.2269 of 2021
and
C.M.P.Nos.17234 & 17235 of 2021
Date: 22.10.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
