Dismissed

K.R.Santharam v. Kuttai D.Venkataraman

Madras HC17 Apr 2024CRP(MD)/176/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court dismissed a civil revision petition challenging the trial court's refusal to amend a plaint to include additional properties. While stating the petition itself lacks merit, the court granted liberty to the petitioners to file a proper separate application for these properties, setting the revision aside for that purpose.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioners to file appropriate application for Plot No. 105 Anna Nagar; petition otherwise dismissed.

K.R.Santharam Vs Kuttai D.Venkataraman — Partition | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

C.R.P.(MD)No.176 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

Date of Reserved : 27/03/2024 Date of Pronounced : 17/04/2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

The Hon'ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN

¶6

C.R.P(MD)No.176 of 2024 and CMP(MD)No.728 of 2024

¶7

1.Dr.K.R.Santharam

¶8

2.Dr.Thilak Santharam : Revision Petitioners/

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.Sri.Kuttai D.Venkatraman : 1^st Respondent/

¶11

^st Defendant

¶12

2.Smt.K.R.S.Girija Shyamsundar : 2^nd Respondent/ 3^rd Plaintiff

¶13

PRAYER: -Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the order, dated 20/10/2023 in IA No.653 of 2019 in OS No.24 of 2017 on the file of the 6^th Additional District Judge, Madurai in so far as it relates to the dismissal of the prayer for amendment in relation to the property in plot No.101, Anna Nagar, Madurai.

¶14

For Petitioners : Mr.T.Thevan

¶15

For 1^st Respondent : Mr.M.Rajaraman

¶16

For 2^nd Respondent : No appearance

¶17

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

¶18

1/6

¶19

C.R.P.(MD)No.176 of 2024

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

This civil revision petition is filed seeking an order to set aside the order, dated 20/10/2023 in IA No. 653 of 2019 of 2019 in OS No.24 of 2017 on the file of the 6^th Additional District Judge, Madurai in so far as it relates to the dismissal of the prayer for amendment in relation to the property in plot No.101, Anna Nagar, Madurai.

¶22

2. The facts in brief :-

¶23

Suit in OS No.24 of 2017 was filed by the plaintiffs namely the petitioners and the second respondent herein seeking the relief of partition and separate possession in respect of their 3/4^th share in the suit property and for costs. The defendants entered appearance and filed written statement. During the course of the trial process, IA No.653 of 2019 was taken out by the petitioners herein to amend the plaint by including certain properties. That application was filed in IA No.660 of 2018. That was allowed. This petition is taken out to amend the plaint consequently. At that time of hearing the petition, they wanted to include Plot No.105 Anna Nagar, Madurai along Door Nos.98 and 99, Kamarajar Salai, Madurai.

¶24

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

¶25

2/6

¶26

C.R.P.(MD)No.176 of 2024

¶27

3.That was resisted by the 1^st respondent herein

¶28

stating that no permission was granted to the petitioners to include the Plot No.105, Anna Nagar, Madurai. So according to them, it is their personal property purchased out of their own funds, by document, dated 14/04/1980 I.e., the absolute property of the 1^st defendant.

¶29

4.After hearing both sides, the trial court

¶30

concluded that no permission was granted to the petitioners to include the Plot No.105, Anna Nagar, Madurai. In respect of Door Nos.98 and 99 at Kamarajanar Salai, Madurai, the application was allowed.

¶31

5.Against which, this civil revision petition is preferred.

¶32

6.Heard both sides.

¶33

7.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would make lengthy submission with regard to the genesis of the issue between the parties, nature of the properties, etc. But he missed the important point that no permission was granted by the trial court to include

¶34

the Plot No.105, Anna Nagar, Madurai. How can

¶35

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

¶36

3/6

¶37

C.R.P.(MD)No.176 of 2024

¶38

straightaway seek the permission of the court to amend the plaint was not answered by him properly. In spite of that, as mentioned above, he was taking the court to various factual issues.

¶39

8.Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent would submit that he has no objection to grant permission to the petitioners to move application to include Plot No.105, Anna Nagar, Madurai. In that event, he got every right to make objection. Without filing proper petition to include the Plot No.105, Anna Nagar, Madurai straightaway the plaint cannot amended.

¶40

9.Without going into the merits of the matter, I am

¶41

of the considered view that liberty may be granted to the petitioners to move appropriate application to include the Plot No.105 Anna Nagar, Madurai in the plaint. In the event of filing the application, the petition may be decided after affording opportunity to both sides, with this this petition is dismissed.

¶42

10.With this liberty, this civil revision petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶43

17/04/2024

¶44

Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No er

¶45

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

¶46

4/6

¶47

C.R.P.(MD)No.176 of 2024

¶48

To,

¶49

1.The 6^th Additional District Judge, Madurai.

¶50

2.The Section Officer, ER/VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶51

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

¶52

5/6

¶53

C.R.P.(MD)No.176 of 2024

¶54

G.ILANGOVAN, J

¶55

¶56

C.R.P(MD)No.176 of 2024

¶57

17/04/2024

¶58

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

¶59

6/6

K.R.Santharam v. Kuttai D.Venkataraman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.R.Santharam v. Kuttai D.Venkataraman

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 Parvathi

Jebaselvi Jeyakumari Vs S.T.Ponniah

Sakthivel Vs The Inspector of Police

Renuga Devi Vs Velmurugan

Cholamandalam Ms General Vs Selvi Alias Palaniselvi

M.Babu Vs a.R.Saravanan