Madras High Court
K.R.Chidambaram vs Seetha Chidambaram on 8 June, 2023
C.R.P.(MD)No.2073 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 08.06.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
C.R.P.(MD)No.2073 of 2022
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.9504 of 2022
K.R.Govindan (Died)
1.K.R.Chidambaram
2.R.Chidambaram
3.CT.Srinivasan
4.CT.Alagappan .. Petitioners
[Cause title accepted vide order dated 28.09.2022, made
in C.M.P.(MD)No.9001 of 2022]
Versus
1.Seetha Chidambaram
2.C.Venkatachalam
3.Seethai Achi alias Noorjahan Beevi
4.Senthilkumar
5.No.II Joint Sub Registrar,
Office of Joint Sub Registrar - II,
Karaikudi Town and Taluk,
Sivagangai District. .. Respondents
Prayer :- Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the
order dated 08.12.2021, passed in I.A.No.1 of 2021 in O.S.No.47 of 2018, on the file
of Subordinate Court, Devakottai.
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Sundar Srinivasan
For R1 to R4 : No Appearance
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/7
C.R.P.(MD)No.2073 of 2022
For R5 : Mr.S.Kameswaran
Government Advocate
ORDER
The petitioners herein are third parties to O.S.No.47 of 2018 filed by the
respondents 1 and 2 against the respondents 3 and 4 and also the fifth respondent,
who is the official respondent. The above suit has been filed for a declaration,
permanent injunction and mandatory injunction. The suit is predicated on the ground
that the respondents 1 and 2 have deliberately failed to implead the petitioners
herein, as the property belongs to CV.CT. family and not to the husband of the first
respondent and father of the second respondent namely, late CV.CT.Chidambaram
Chettiar.
2. It is submitted that the petitioners also belong to CV.CT. family and that the
petitioners and also the second respondent have right over the property and therefore,
the petitioners are entitled to be impleaded as plaintiffs 3 to 7 in the above suit.
Therefore, they have filed I.A.No.1 of 2021 under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of C.P.C. on
16.02.2021 before commencement of the trial.
3. The Trial Court has rejected the application primarily on the ground that the
respondents 1 and 2 are the plaintiffs and therefore, they are dominus litis. It is
submitted that the Trial Court dismissed the application on the ground that the suit
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(MD)No.2073 of 2022
has been filed to declare the sale deed executed by the third respondent in favour of
the fourth respondent on 02.06.2011 as null and void and therefore, it is open for the
petitioners to file a separate suit. The operative portion of the impugned order reads
as under:-
''6.,e;epiyapy; mry; tof;fpd; 2k;gpujpthjp kl;LNk ,jid
Ml;Nrgid nra;J vjpHciu jhf;fy; nra;Js;shH. ,e;j
kDjhuHfSf;F ,Ue;J tUtjhf nrhy;yg;gLk; chpikia thjpfs;
Vd; ftdj;jpy; vLj;Jf;nfhs;stpy;iy vd;gij ,k;kDjhuHfs;
nka;gpf;f flikg;gl;Ls;sdH. vdNt mry; tof;F jhf;fy; nra;Ak;
fhyj;jpy; $l;lhf NrHe;J ,t;tof;F jhf;fy; nra;ag;gltpy;iy vdTk;
chpik ,Uf;Fk; gl;rj;jpy; jdpahf tof;F jhf;fy; nra;a ,aYk;
vdTk; xj;j fUj;J ,y;yhj thjpfNshL jq;fisAk;
NrHj;Jf;nfhs;sf; NfhUtJ Ntbf;ifahf cs;sJ. vdNt
fhyjhkjkhf ,k;kD jhf;fy; nra;ag;gl;bUg;gjhy; js;Sgb
nra;aNtz;Lk; vdTk; vjpHciuapy; njhptpf;fg;gl;Ls;sJ. Vida
vjpHkDjhuHfs; ve;j xU Ml;NrgiziaAk; ,t;tof;fpy; jhf;fy;
nra;atpy;iy.
7.jhth mry; tof;F jhth nrhj;ijg;nghWj;J 02.06.2011 md;W
Vw;gl;Ls;s Mtzj;ij rl;lg;gb nry;yhJ vdTk;> ,y;yhj epiyia
cilaJ vdTk; tpsk;Gif nra;af;NfhhpAk;> epue;ju cWj;Jf;fl;lis
ghpfhuk; NfhhpAk; jhf;fy; nra;ag;gl;Ls;sJ. ,e;j mry;
tof;if ,k;kDtpd; 1 kw;Wk; 2tJ vjpHkDjhuHfs; jhf;fy;
nra;Js;shHfs;. ,e;j 1> 2 vjpHkDjhuHfs; thjpfshf ,Ue;J gpuhij
jhf;fy; nra;Ak;NghJ ,e;j kDjhuHfisAk; xU jug;gpdHfshf fl;rp
NrHf;f tpUk;gpapUf;ftpy;iy. ,J ghfg; gphptpid tof;fhf mikahj
#o;epiyapy; midj;J chpikahsHfisAk;> ghj;jpa];jHfisAk;
fl;rp NrHf;fNtz;baJ mtrpak; ,y;iy vd thjpfs;
fUjpajhf ,k;kDjhuHfis fl;rp Nrh;f;ftpy;iy. ,e;epiyapy; ,e;j
kDjhuHfs; jw;Nghija mry; tof;fpy;
thjpfshf ,izj;Jf;nfhs;tjw;F Nghjpa Kfhe;jpuk; ,Ue;J
tUfpwjh vd;ij ghHf;fNtz;Lk;.
8.xU Mtzk; rl;lg;gb nry;yhJ vd tpsk;Gif nra;af;NfhUk;
tof;fpy; ahH ahiu jug;gpdHfshf NrHj;Jf;nfhs;sNtz;Lk; vd;gJ
thjpfspd; KbT MFk;. gpuhjpy; NfhhpAs;s ghpfhuj;ij ngWtjw;F
mtrpakhd Kfhe;jpuq;fis vLj;Jiuj;J nka;gpf;f Ntz;baJ
thjpfspd; flikahFk;. mg;gb ,Uf;Fk;NghJ ,t;tof;fpy;
thjpfs; ,k;kDjhuHfis fl;rp NrHf;fhky; mry;tof;if jhf;fy;
nra;Js;sdH. jhth nrhj;Jf;fs; jq;fSf;F kl;LNk ghj;jpag;gl;lJ
vd tpsk;Gif ghpfhuk; vJTk; Nfhug;gltpy;iy. jhth nrhj;jpid
nghWj;J Vw;gl;Ls;s fpiua Mtzq;fs; rl;lg;gb nry;yf;$bajhf
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(MD)No.2073 of 2022
mike;jpUf;fpwjh ,y;iyah vd;gNj jPHT fhzNtz;ba gpur;ridahf
mike;Js;sJ. mt;thW fhzg;gLk; jPHT ,e;j kDjhuHfspd;
chpikia ve;j tpjj;jpYk; ghjpf;ff; $bajhf mikahJ.
vjpHciuapy; nrhy;ypapUg;gJNghy jhth nrhj;Jf;fspy;
kDjhuHfSf;F VNjDk; chpik ,Ue;J tUkhdhy; mjidg;
nghWj;J jdpahf mry; tof;F jhf;fy; nra;tjw;F chpik
cs;sJ. ,k;kDjhuHfspd; chpikia jPHkhdpg;gjw;fhf ve;j xU
gpur;ridAk; mry; tof;fpy; ,Ue;J tutpy;iy. vdNt ,e;j
kDjhuHfis mtrpa jug;gpdHfshf fUj ,ayhJ vdTk;> thjpfs;
tpUk;ghj epiyapy; mtHfSld; ,k;kDjhuHfs; NrHe;Jf;nfhs;tjw;F
cj;jputpLtJ Vw;Wf;nfhs;sf; $bajhf mikahJ vdTk; ,e;j
ePjpkd;wk; fUJfpwJ. me;j tifapy; ,k;kDit js;Sgb
nra;aNtz;Lk; vd ,e;j gpur;ridf;F jPHT fhzg;gLfpwJ.
Kbthf> ,k;kD js;Sgb nra;J cj;jputplg;gLfpwJ.
nryTj;njhif ,y;iy.''
4. The purpose of a judgment and decree is to bring a finality to the dispute
between the parties. The petitioners came to know about the filing of the suit in
respect of the sale deed dated 02.06.2011, which is said to have been executed in
favour of the fourth respondent by the third respondent only in August 2020.
5. Considering the fact that the allegation in the plaint that the property in
question belongs to CV.CT.Chidambaram Chettiar alone and not to the petitioners
herein, would be an one sided argument and it could not settle the dispute,
particularly, in the light of the fact that the petitioners also claim right over the
property, being the members of the same CV.CT. family, I am therefore of the view
that no prejudice will be caused, if the petitioners herein are impleaded as defendants
4 to 8.
6. Considering the above, I am inclined to dispose of this Civil Revision
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(MD)No.2073 of 2022
Petition, by directing impleadment of the petitioners herein as defendants 4 to 8 in
O.S.No.47 of 2018.
7. Considering the fact that the above suit has been filed in the year 2018, the
learned Sub Judge, Devakottai, shall dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible,
preferably within a period of 15 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order, provided, if it had not been disposed of already. The petitioners shall file a
written statement in the suit within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a
copy of this order before the Sub Court, Devakottai.
8. This Civil Revision Petition stands disposed of with the above directions.
No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
NCC : Yes/No 08.06.2023
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
smn2
To
1.The Subordinate Judge,
Devakottai.
2.The Joint Sub Registrar No.II,
Office of Joint Sub Registrar - II,
Karaikudi Town and Taluk,
Sivagangai District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(MD)No.2073 of 2022
C.SARAVANAN, J.
smn2
Order made in
C.R.P.(MD)No.2073 of 2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P.(MD)No.2073 of 2022
08.06.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
