S.Murugan v. Rasu
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court dismissed a Civil Revision Petition challenging a trial court order that rejected an application to implead additional parties. The court held that the proposed parties were not connected with the cause of action and thus were not proper parties for the ongoing civil suit.
What did the court decide?
Civil Revision Petition and connected miscellaneous petition dismissed; order to which the challenge was made stands affirmed.
What the court decided
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 10.02.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAVINDRAN
C.R.P(PD) No.397 of 2017 and CMP.No.1850 of 2017
S.Murugan
.. Petitioner
Vs.
- Rasu
- Sivakumar
- Ramakrishan
- The Village Administrative Officer, Pozhakkudi Village, Nanilam Taluk, Nannilam Munsif.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the proposed parties are proper and necessary parties for adjudicating the issues in the suit for recovery of possession and permanent injunction.
Whether the Civil Revision Petition challenging the dismissal of the petition to implead parties should be allowed.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
S.Murugan
- respondent
Rasu
- respondent
Sivakumar
- respondent
Ramakrishan
- respondent
The Village Administrative Officer, Pozhakkudi Village
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court