Selvam v. Balakrishnan
Case brief
What is this about?
High Court dismissed petitions challenging the trial court's order allowing impleading of joint pattadhars as necessary parties in a suit for title declaration to avoid multiple proceedings and ensure proper adjudication.
What did the court decide?
Civil Revision Petitions dismissed; no order as to costs.
What the court decided
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT RESERVED ON : 28.06.2017
PRONOUNCED ON : 05.07.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
| CRP.PD | (MD).Nos.2525 and 2526 of 2015 |
|---|---|
| Selvam | ...Petitioner in both CRPs / Plaintiff |
| Vs | |
| 1.Balakrishnan | |
| 2.Rajagopal | |
| 3.Veerakumar | ... Respondents 1 to 3 in CRP.No.2525 of 2015/ Proposal Defendants 2 to 4. |
| 4.Panneer Selvam | ... 4thRespondent/1stDefendant |
| 1.Vairavan | |
| 2.Thirukumar | |
| 3.Mohan 4.Palanivelu |
...Respondents in CRP.No.2526 of 2015 |
Common Prayer:- Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, setting aside the fair and decreetal orders in I.A.Nos.359 and 360 of 2014 in O.S.No.48 of 2013 dated 26.08.2015 on the file of the District Munsif Court of Aranthangi.
| For Peti | tioner in | |
|---|---|---|
| both CRP | s. |
: Mr.N.Balakrishnan |
| For RR1 | to 3 | |
| in both | CRPs | : Mr.K.Balasundaram |
| For R.4 | in both | |
| CRPs | : Mr.V.S.Badrinath |
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether joint pattadhars are necessary parties to a suit for declaration of title involving disputed property.
Whether dismissing the petitions would lead to multiplicity of legal proceedings.
Whether the trial court erred in allowing impleading applications of proposed defendants.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Selvam
- respondent
Balakrishnan
- respondent
Rajagopal
- respondent
Veerakumar
- respondent
Paneer Selvam
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court