Madras High Court
Siva Mugoundane vs Sivaloganathan on 9 March, 2022
C.R.P.(NPD) No.655 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 09.03.2022
CORAM : JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE
C.R.P.(NPD) No.655 of 2022
and C.M.P.No.3372 of 2022
1.Siva Mugoundane
2.Siva Shanmugam
3.Chandramathi
4.Sivaji ... Petitioners / appellants
Vs.
1.Sivaloganathan
2.Sivabakkiam ... Respondents / respondents
Prayer : Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution
of India, as against the fair and decretal order dated 15.03.2021 passed in
I.A.No.364 of 2019 in A.S. No.40 of 2018, pending on the file of III
Additional District Judge, Puducherry.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Subramaniam for
Mr.V.V.Sairam
ORDER
This revision petition is filed as against the fair and decretal
order dated 15.03.2021 passed in I.A.No.364 of 2019 in A.S. No.40 of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(NPD) No.655 of 2022
2018, pending on the file of III Additional District Judge, Puducherry.
2. The plaintiffs in O.S.No.33 of 2011 are the revision petitioners
herein. They laid the suit against the defendants/respondents herein,
seeking to declare certain donation deed dated 30.04.2010 executed by the
first defendant in favour of the second defendant is not binding on the
plaintiffs. The suit came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 27.03.2018.
The plaintiffs have preferred an Appeal Suit in AS.No.40 of 2018. In this
appeal, the plaintiffs have taken out an interlocutory application in
I.A.No.364 of 2019 for amending the plaint. This was dismissed vide
impugned order of the first Appellate Judge inter alia on the ground that
allowing the amendment would change the very nature and character of the
suit.
3. Heard Mr.R.Subramaniam, for Mr.V.V.Sairam, learned counsel
for the revision petitioners.
4. This Court has also come across another amendment sought and
the quintessence of the amendment sought for is that the aforesaid donation
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(NPD) No.655 of 2022
deed was beyond the extent permitted by French Civil Code and as such,
the aforesaid donation deed cannot be sustained under the French Civil
Code.
5. The learned counsel would now argue that the suit is laid for
declaration that the entire donation deed will not be binding on the
plaintiffs and the plea now taken is a legal plea, which is only going to
demonstrate as to how and why the said donation deed may not be binding
on the plaintiffs or is it invalid beyond the extent permitted by the French
Civil Code.
6. This Court is satisfied that another amendment sought essentially
is introducing only a legal plea. In other words, what it now seeks is to
test the validity of the donation deed in question on the obligation of
French Civil Code and test it for sustainability. This is an essential aspect
of law. This Court, may not be in agreement with the learned first
Appellate Judge that the point raised in the amendment will alter the nature
and character of the suit, yet, it does not want to interfere with this
ultimate result, since the point raised is only on pure question of law and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(NPD) No.655 of 2022
procedural law does not require to be pleaded or its consequence and
therefore, it is open to the revision petitioners/appellants before the first
Appellate Court to defend arguments on the legal issues if so strategized.
7. The revision petitions is disposed of, accordingly. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
09.03.2022
dn
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
Speaking order / Non-speaking order
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(NPD) No.655 of 2022
N.SESHASAYEE.J.,
dn
C.R.P.(NPD) No.655 of 2022
09.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
