High Court allowed the civil revision petition, setting aside the lower court order dismissed the plea to implead the petitioner as a necessary party to the suit and directed his impleadment within four weeks.
The order in I.A.No. 28 of 2011 was set aside and the petitioner was directed to implead himself as defendant No. 4.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
C.R.P.(NPD) No.1305 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04.02.2020
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN
C.R.P.(PD) No.1305 of 2013
and
M.P.No.1 of 2013
S.S.Murugesan ...Petitioner
..Vs..
1.Somasundaram
2.The District Collector,
Namakkal
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Tiruchengode
4.The Tahsildar,
Tiruchengode ...Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal order of the Additional District Munsif Court at Tiruchengode dated 26.02.2013 in I.A.No.28 of 2011 in O.S.No.228 of 2010.
For Petitioner :Mr.P.Valliappan
For R1 : No appearance
For R2 to R4 : Mr.S.Jaganathan,
Government Advocate
C.R.P.(NPD) No.1305 of 2013
O R D E R
Mr.S.Jaganathan, learned Government Advocate takes notice
on behalf of respondents 2 to 4.
the first respondent, paper publication has been effected and proof filed, but none appeared.
use of the pathway.
28 of 2011 seeking to implead himself in the suit on the ground that
he had purchased the lands in S.No.209/5 in Rajapalayam village by way of sale deed and his vendor was enjoying the property which is classified
as 'Kallanguthu poromboke' by cultivation and hence, he made an application to the Revenue Authorities for assigning the cultivating rights and grant of patta and the said application is in the process.
C.R.P.(NPD) No.1305 of 2013
suit by without impleading him as a party and therefore, he has also stated that unless he was impleaded in the suit, final adjudication of the dispute cannot be decided. However, the learned District Munsif, Tiruchengode, taking into consideration the facts observed that it is for the plaintiff to disprove the defence and dismissed the application. Hence, this Civil Revision Petition.
C.R.P.(NPD) No.1305 of 2013
04.02.2020
nvi
Index:Yes/No
Speaking Order:Yes/No
To
The Additional District Munsif Court, Tiruchengode
C.R.P.(NPD) No.1305 of 2013 RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN,J.,
nvi
C.R.P.(PD) No.1305 of 2013 and
M.P.No.1 of 2013
04.02.2020
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is a necessary party to the underlying suit requiring impleadment for final adjudication.
Whether to set aside the impugned order dismissing the application to implead the petitioner.
S.S. Murugesan
Somasundaram
The District Collector, Namakkal
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruchengode
The Tahsildar, Tiruchengode
RMT. Teekaa Raman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
