Dismissed

A. Venkatesan, v. D.M. Maheshwaran

Madras HC9 Aug 2024CMP(MD)/5675/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners who are subsequent purchasers of permits sought to be impleaded as respondents in appeals and appeal suits arising from a final decree. The High Court held these purchasers are neither necessary nor proper parties and must seek remedies against their vendors. The petitions were dismissed and main appeals listed for disposal.

What did the court decide?

Petitions to implead petitioners as respondents were dismissed as they are neither necessary nor proper parties.

A. Venkatesan, Vs D.M. Maheshwaran — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

CMP(MD) No.5675 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Ninth day of August Two Thousand and Twenty Four

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice P.VELMURUGAN

¶5

and

¶6

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN C.M.P(MD)Nos.5675 & 5676 of 2022 and 3278 of 2019

¶7

¶8

A.S.(MD)Nos.145 & 147 of 2017

¶9

A.VENKATESAN ... PETITIONER/PROPOSED RESPONDENT IN CMP(MD).5675/2022

¶10

V.SELVI ... PETITIONER/PROPOSED RESPONDENT IN CMP(MD).5676/2022 1 B.S.KUMARESH 2 M.V.PREETHI ... PETITIONERS/PROPOSED 6 & 7 RESPONDENTS IN CMP(MD).3278/2019

¶11

¶12

1 D.M.MAHESHWARAN ... 1ST RESPONDENT/APPELLANT

¶13

2 M.PARAMESWARAN, D.MAYANDI (DIED)

¶14

3 D.M.VENKATESWARAN,

¶15

4 B.CHAMUNDEESWARI,

¶16

5 UNION BANK OF INDIA, KOCHADAI BRANCH, THENI MAIN ROAD, P.P. CHAVADI, MADURAI. THROUGH ITS MANAGER https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

1/4

¶18

CMP(MD) No.5675 of 2022

¶19

M.PITCHAI (DIED)

¶20

6 JEYA

¶21

... RESPONDENTS 2 TO 5/RESPONDENTS

¶22

IN CMP(MD).5675 & 5676/2022

¶23

1 D.M.VENKATESHWARAN

¶24

... 1ST RESPONDENT/APPELLANT

2 M.K.PARAMESWARAN

3 D.M.MAHESWARAN

4 B.CHAMUNDEESWARI

5 UNION BANK OF INDIA KOCHADAI BRANCH THENI MAIN ROAD, P.P.CHAVADI, MADURAI THROUGH ITS MANAGER

¶29

6 JEYA

¶30

... 2 TO 6 RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 5 IN CMP(MD).3278/2019

¶31

Prayer in CMP(MD).5675/2022 :

¶32

To pass an order to implead the petitioner herein as respondent in AS(MD) No. 145 of 2017.

¶33

Prayer in CMP(MD).5676/2022 :

¶34

To pass an order to implead the petitioner herein as respondent in AS(MD) No.145 of 2017.

¶35

Prayer in AS(MD).145/2017 :

¶36

To set aside the Judgment and Decree passed in O.S.No.12 of 2006 on the file of the IV Additional District Judge, Madurai dated 10.07.2013.

¶37

Prayer in CMP(MD).3278/2019 :

¶38

To permit the petitioners to implead as Respondents No.6 & 7 as a party in the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis above said Appeal Suit (MD) No.147 of 2017 pending on the file of this Honble Court.

¶39

2/4

¶40

CMP(MD) No.5675 of 2022

¶41

Prayer in AS(MD).147/2017 :

¶42

To set aside the judgment and decree dated 10.07.2013 in O.S.12 of 2006 on the file of 4^th Additional District Court, Madurai and allow this first appeal.

¶43

ORDER : This petition coming up for orders on this day, upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of MR.S.ANAND CHANDRASEKAR, Advocate for M/S.SARVABHAUMAN ASSOCIATES for the petitioner in CMP(MD).5675 & 5676/2022 and of MR.K.MURALEEDHARAN, Advocate for the petitioner in CMP(MD).3278/2019, the court made the following order:-

¶44

The appeal suits are arising out of the final decree passed before the trial Court.

¶45

2.The petitioners are the subsequent purchasers and they have purchased the

¶46

permits from some of the legal heirs pending final decree proceedings and pending appeals. Therefore, they are not necessary parties either in the appeal or in the final decree proceedings. If at all they got any right or grievance, they have to workout their remedy against their vendor before the appropriate forum. As the petitioners are neither the necessary parties nor the proper parties, the petitions are liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, all the petitions are dismissed.

¶47

3.List the main appeals for final disposal on 09.09.2024.

¶48

sd/09/08/2024 / TRUE COPY /

¶49

/08/2024

¶50

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶51

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶52

3/4

¶53

CMP(MD) No.5675 of 2022

¶54

¶55

THE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MADURAI.

¶56

+2 CC to M/s.M/S.SARVABHAUMAN ASSOCIATES, Advocate ( SR-9789[I] & SR-9790[I] dated 12/08/2024 )

¶57

ORDER IN C.M.P(MD)Nos.5675 & 5676 of 2022 and 3278 of 2019 in A.S.(MD)Nos.145 & 147 of 2017 Date :09/08/2024

¶58

RS/JGB/SAR-(23.08.2024) 4P 4C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023

¶59

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶60

4/4

A. Venkatesan, v. D.M. Maheshwaran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A. Venkatesan, v. D.M. Maheshwaran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Managing Director Vs N.John Justus

V. Pachaikannu Thevar, Vs the Competent Authority and

K. Paulraj, S/O. Kamalan Gener Vs the Principal Secretary

Ramasamy, Vs Dhavamani(Died) 1.Pandi Meenal

Kannan @ Kevin Paul Vs Selvi Jasmin Suganthi

Rajaish Samuel Lazarus Vs M.Thangaiah Lazarus (Deceased)