Kamatchi v. Dhanapal
Case brief
What is this about?
In this civil revision, Kamakshi challenged the dismissal of her impleading application in a partition suit. The Court held she was not a necessary party as she cannot claim shares in Sengamuthu's property and other branch members have no interest.
What did the court decide?
Civil Revision Petition dismissed. Connected miscellaneous petition closed.
What the court decided
C.R.P.No.408 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 15.07.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN
C.R.P.No.408 of 2023 and C.M.P.No.3453 of 2023
Kamatchi
... Petitioner
-Vs-
1.Dhanapal 2.T.Thangam 3.Chinnaponnu 4.Vellaimmal @ Vellachi 5.Lakshmi 6.Santhanam 7.A.Sathya 8.Thiagarajan
9.Viswanathan
... Respondents
Prayer : Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order and decreetal order in I.A.No.15 of 2021 in O.S.No.316 of 2017 dated 19.01.2023 by the Sub Court, Jayankondam.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a cousin (Kamakshi) is a necessary party to a suit for partition filed by the plaintiff against her uncles.
Whether relatives of the other branch of sharers are proper or necessary parties to a partition suit regarding properties inherited by the plaintiff's father.
Whether the Subordinate Judge correctly dismissed the application for impleading the petitioner.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Kamakshi
- respondent
Dhanapal
- respondent
T. Thangam
- respondent
Chinnaponnu
- respondent
Vellaimmal @ Vellachi
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court