Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 7456 Mad
Judgement Date : 3 July, 2023
C.R.P.No.3452 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 03.07.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN
C.R.P.No.3452 of 2015
and M.P.No.1 of 2015
1.Angathal
2.Natarajan .. Petitioners
vs
Vijayalakshmi .. Respondent
Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India
against the fair and decreetal order dated 07.03.2015 made in
I.A.No.505 of 2015 n O.S.No.434 of 2013 on the file of IV
Additional District and Sessions Court, Coimbatore.
For Petitioners : Mr.K.Venkatasubban
For Respondent : No appearance
ORDER
The defendants / petitioners seek to revise the order passed
in I.A.No.505 of 2014.
2. The plaintiff / respondent claims the property on
account of death of her father Murugaian @ Murugaiah Gounder.
Murugaian @ Murugaiah Gounder, married one Angathal, who is
the first defendant. From the marriage, the plaintiff and the second
defendant were born. As already premised, there is no dispute in https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.No.3452 of 2015
the relationship between the parties.
3. Since the relationship between the parties was
admitted, the plaintiff took up the application under Order 18 Rule
1 CPC seeking the respondent to begin the trial in suit. The learned
trial Judge, allowed the application on the ground that if the Will
dated 04.09.1988 is proved, there is no question of going through
the matter for trial. This is the case in which the Will has been
projected to hold that the plaintiff does not have the share in the
property.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner rely on a judgment
of this Court in the case of K.Shanmugha Gandhi v K.Venugopal
and others [2009 SCC Online Mad 485]. A reading of the judgment
does not show that the fifth defendant, who was the revision
petitioner in that case was a subsequent purchaser of the share.
5. Here, the title of the property and the relationship
between the parties are not in dispute and the dispute is with
respect to the Will, which is true and genuine. If the Will is proved,
the plaintiff is out of the Court. If the Will is not proved, the
plaintiff will be entitled to the share by virtue of succession. It is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.No.3452 of 2015
in that circumstances, that the learned trial Judge felt that the
defendants will have to enter the witness box and prove the case.
6. In any event, the exercise of discretion is under Order
18 Rule 1 CPC by learned trial Judge. It is a matter for procedure.
The order is not perverse or tainted with illegality. I do not find
any reason to interfere with the same in this civil revision petition.
7. Being of the year 2013, the learned IV Additional
Judge, Coimbatore, is requested to take up the suit on priority
basis and dispose the same within a period of six months from
today. Let a report be submitted by the IV Additional Judge,
Coimbatore to this Court.
8. With the above direction, this civil revision petition is
dismissed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
03.07.2023
Index:Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes/No ssm
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.No.3452 of 2015
V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN,J.
ssm
To
The IV Additional District and Sessions Court, Coimbatore.
C.R.P.No.3452 of 2015
03.07.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!