The High Court dismissed a Civil Revision Petition challenging a trial court order rejecting an application to amend a plaint in a property suit. The revisionist failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for interference, and the appeal against the trial court's decision was rejected.
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.No.534 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 21.07.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTIC E V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
C.R.P.No.534 of 2023 and
C.M.P.No.4378 of 2023
Govindan
... Petitioner
Vs
1.Selvarasu
2.Minnalkodi
3.Rajendiran
... Respondents
Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the fair and decreetal order dated 26.09.2022 made in I.A.No.562 of 2018 in O.S.No.262 of 2015 passed by the Additional District Munsif Court, Jayankondam.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Dinesh Kumar
For Respondents : Mr.R.V.Pradeep
for Raja Raja Chozhan
1/6
C.R.P.No.534 of 2023
ORDER
Challenge is laid to the order dated 26.09.2022 passed by the learned
Additional District Munsiff, Jayankondam, in I.A.No.562 of 2018 in O.S.No.262 of 2015.
O.S.No.262 of 2015 praying to pass a judgment and decree of declaration
and permanent injunction. When the suit was pending, the plaintiff filed I.A.No.562 of 2018 seeking to amend the plaint, dismissal of which, led to the present revision petition.
2/6
C.R.P.No.534 of 2023
item in suit schedule property. According to him, taking advantage of the fact that the plaintiff and his family is away from the property, the defendants encroached the suit schedule property and put up an asbestos sheet structure. The petitioner gave complaint before the police authorities and during enquiry, the respondents/defendants agreed to remove the encroachment. Though the petitioner put up a fence, on 27.07.2015, the defendants attempted to trespass the property. In such circumstances, the suit was filed by the plaintiff, in which the interlocutory application was filed to amend the plaint.
averments made in the application. According to them, the claim of the plaintiff is bereft of merit and the suit schedule property never vest with the plaintiff's family.
3/6
C.R.P.No.534 of 2023
failed to consider the grounds raised by the petitioner and thus the order of the Trial Court is erroneous and the same has to be set aside.
Court.
4/6
C.R.P.No.534 of 2023
21.07.2023
jai
Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No
5/6
C.R.P.No.534 of 2023
V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, J.
jai
To
The Additional District Munsiff Court, Jayakondam.
C.R.P.No.534 of 2023
21.07.2023
6/6
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the revision petitioner has shown sufficient cause to interfere with the trial court's order dismissing his amendment application.
Whether the trial court erred in dismissing the interim application seeking to alter the suit schedule.
Govindan
Selvarasu
Minnalkodi
Rajendiran
E.V. Bhavani Subbaroyan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
