Allowed

Kodi Arasi v. Kuppayee Ammal (Died) 1. T.Panneerselvam

Madras HC15 Oct 2024CRP/3543/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a partition suit, the plaintiff sought to amend the plaint to add a family property left out, after learning of it while filing an additional proof affidavit. The trial court dismissed the amendment application for delay. Allowing the revision under Article 227, the High Court held strict amendment rules for declaratory suits do not apply to partition suits and set aside the order.

What did the court decide?

Order dismissing amendment application set aside; petitioner granted leave to amend the plaint; no costs; connected CMP closed.

Kodi Arasi Vs Kuppayee Ammal (Died) 1. T.Panneerselvam — Partition | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

C.R.P.(PD)No.3543 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 15.10.2024

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN

¶6

C.R.P.(PD)No.3543 of 2024 and C.M.P.No.19175 of 2024

Kodi Arasi

.. Petitioner

Kuppayee Ammal (died)

¶11

1.T.Panneerselvam 2.Rangasamy

¶12

3.Periyasamy

¶13

4.Seerangan

¶14

5.Kaveri

¶15

6.Raja

¶16

7.Selvi .. Respondents

¶17

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the fair and decretal order dated 15.06.2024 in I.A.No.7 of 2024 in O.S.No.1203 of 2004 on the file of the II Additional District Munsif Court, Salem.

¶18

For Petitioner : Ms.J.Prithivi

¶19

For Respondents : No appearance

¶20

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

¶21

1/5

¶22

C.R.P.(PD)No.3543 of 2024

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

The civil revision petition is at the instance of the plaintiff.

¶25

O.S.No.1203 of 2004 was filed seeking for partition, declaration and several other reliefs. The trial has yet to pickup a scheme. The plaintiff had filed a proof affidavit when the 2^nd defendant was set exparte. Subsequently, the said defendant moved an application to set aside the exparte order, and the same has been set aside. Therefore, the entire exercise has to be recommenced.

¶26

The plaintiff now has to file an additional proof affidavit, in the light of the exparte order, having been set aside as against the legal representatives of the deceased 1^st defendant. In the meantime, the plaintiff came to know that one property was left out in the suit and hence, she took out an application to amend the plaint. This application was received in I.A.No.7 of 2024. After a counter was received, the learned Judge proceeded to dismiss the said application. Hence, this revision.

¶27

Notice to the respondents was ordered on 03.09.2024. The respondents were served but they have not entered appearance.

¶28

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

¶29

2/5

¶30

C.R.P.(PD)No.3543 of 2024

¶31

Ms.J.Prithivi would contend that the plaintiff came to know that this property had been left out only when the matter was posted for filing of additional proof affidavit by the plaintiff. Hence, the application for amendment was taken out immediately on coming to know the said facts.

¶32

Heard the learned counsel for the civil revision petitioner. I have gone through the records.

¶33

The case is one for partition. In a partition action, in case any property of the family is left out, it can entail the dismissal of the suit for suffering from the VICE of partial partition. It is only in those circumstances that the Courts have always held that an application for amendment to include a property which has been left out can be entertained at any stage, including at the second appellate stage. In fact, if there is no dispute on the nature of the property, even during the final decree proceedings, a property can be included by way of an amendment. When such being the position of law, the order of the learned II Additional District Munsif at Salem, which is impugned before me, requires interference. This is because the learned Judge had dismissed the application only on the ground of delay. The strict rules which apply for https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/5

¶34

C.R.P.(PD)No.3543 of 2024

¶35

amendment in case of a declaratory suit would not apply to a partition

¶36

suit.

¶37

In the light of the above discussion, the Civil Revision Petition stands allowed. The order passed in I.A.No.7 of 2024 in O.S.No.1203 of 2004 is set aside. Leave is granted to the petitioner to amend the plaint. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶38

15.10.2024

¶39

Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation:Yes/No

¶40

¶41

¶42

II Additional District Munsif, Salem.

¶43

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

¶44

4/5

¶45

C.R.P.(PD)No.3543 of 2024

¶46

V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN,J.

¶47

¶48

C.R.P.(PD)No.3543 of 2024 and C.M.P.No.19175 of 2024

¶49

15.10.2024

¶50

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

¶51

5/5

Kodi Arasi v. Kuppayee Ammal (Died) 1. T.Panneerselvam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kodi Arasi v. Kuppayee Ammal (Died) 1. T.Panneerselvam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kittu (Deceased) 1) K.Snegalatha Vs K.Balaji

Chennimalai Gounder Vs Natraya Gounder (Died) P.N.Ramalingam

V.G.B.Sivaram Prasad Vs S.Rameshbabu

Ananda Kumar Vs Vinothini

R. Saraswathi Vs C. Rajendran

J.Sundharesan Alias Srikanth Vs M.Krithika