Partly allowed¶57

K Rajkumar an 10 Others v. G.Anburaj and 3 Others

Madras HC9 Dec 2025A/5369/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A No. 5369 of 2025 in OP No. 146 of 2020; Madras High Court; P. Dhanabal J.; order dated 09-12-2025; transposition of parties in letters of administration petition; Order XIV Rule 8 Original Side Rules; Order XXIII Rule 1A Code of Civil Procedure; legal heirs arrayed as respondents seek to be transposed as petitioners; Will executed in favour of respondents 1 to 7; respondents 1 to 6 transposed as petitioners 2 to 7; respondents 8, 9, 13 to 15 excluded for want of stated connection to the Will; application partly allowed; estate at Kaliamman Koil Street, Virugambakkam, Chennai.

What did the court decide?

Respondents 1 to 6 in O.P. No. 146 of 2020 transposed as Petitioners 2 to 7 in the main original petition; transposition declined for Respondents 8, 9 and 13 to 15. ¶57

K Rajkumar an 10 Others Vs G.Anburaj and 3 Others — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

A No. 5369 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 09-12-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

¶6

A No. 5369 of 2025 in

¶7

OP NO. 146 OF 2020

¶8

K Rajkumar And 10 Others S/O.v.kARTHIKEYA MURUGESAN, PLOT NO.111, KALIAMMAN KOIL STREET, VIRUGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI-600 092

¶9

2.S.Priya

¶10

D/o.V.Senthur Pandiyan, Plot No.111, Kaliamman Koil Street, Virugambakkam, Chennai-600 092

¶11

3.S.Kavitha

¶12

D/o.V.Senthur Pandiyan, Plot No.111, Kaliamman Koil Street, Virugambakkam, Chennai-600 092

¶13

4.K.Praveenkumar

¶14

S/o.V.Karthikeya Murugesan, Plot No.111, Kaliamman Koil Street, Virugambakkam, Chennai-600 092

¶15

5.G.Radha Ranjini

¶16

Represented Through Her Guardian Mrs.Poonselvi, Plot No.111, Kaliamman Koil Street, Virugambakkam, Chennai-600 092

¶17

6.V.Parthiban

¶18

S/o.A.Veerakumar Nadar, Plot No.111, Kaliamman Koil Street, Virugambakkam, Chennai-600 092

¶19

7.K.Santhosakani

¶20

W/o.V.Karthikeyen, Plot No.111, Kaliamman Koil Street,

¶21

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

¶22

A No. 5369 of 2025

¶23

Virugambakkam, Chennai-600 092

¶24

8.K.Reka

¶25

D/o.V.Karthikeyan, Plot No.111, Kaliamman Koil Street, Virugambakkam, Chennai-600 092

¶26

9.V.Kannan

¶27

S/o.A.Veerakumar Nadar, Plot No.111, Kaliamman Koil Street, Virugambakkam, Chennai-600 092

¶28

10.V.Ravi

¶29

S/o.A.Veerakumar Nadar, Plot No.111, Kaliamman Koil Street, Virugambakkam, Chennai-600 092

¶30

11.S.Sumathi

¶31

W/o.Senthurpandian, PLOT NO.111, KALLIAMMAN KOIL STREET, VIRUGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI-600 092.

¶32

Applicant(s)

¶33

¶34

G.Anburaj And 3 Others S/o.V.Ganesan @ Dhanajayam, Plot No.111, Kaliamman Koil Street, Virugambakkam, Chennai-600 092

¶35

2.Bharath Alias Ganesapandian D/o.V.Vishalakshi, Plot No.111, Kaliamman Koil Street, Virugambakkam, Chennai-600 092

¶36

3.V.Visalashi

¶37

D/o.A.Veerakumar Nadar, Plot No.111, Kaliamman Koil Street, Virugambakkam, Chennai-600 092

¶38

4.V.Ganesan

¶39

S/o.A.Veerakumar Nadar, Plot No.111, Kaliamman Koil Street, Virugambakkam, Chennai-600 092

¶40

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

¶41

A No. 5369 of 2025

¶42

Respondent(s) PRAYER : This application has been filed under Order XIV Rule 8 of Original

¶43

Side Rules read with Order XXIII Rule 1A of Code of Civil Procedure praying

¶44

to transposes the Applicants/Respondents 1 to 6, 8, 9,13,14, 15 in O.P.No.146 of 2020 as Petitioners 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11, 12.

¶45

For Applicant(s): M/s.B.Vijayakumar

¶46

For Respondent: Mr. A. Amal Raj [for R1]

¶47

Mr. S.JIM RAJ MILTON [for R2 and R3]

¶48

ORDER

¶49

This application has been filed by the applicants to transposes the Applicants/Respondents 1 to 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15 in O.P. No.146 of 2020 as Petitioners 2 to 12.

¶50

The learned counsel appearing for the applicants would submit that the applicants are the respondents in the main original petition and the petitioners in the original petition have filed the said petition for grant of letters of administration stating that the applicants herein are not co-operating for the letters of administration, thereby, they filed the application. These applicants are also the legal heirs of the deceased and they were added as respondents in the main petition and they are ready to co-operate with the petitioners and therefore, in order to get appropriate orders, they have to be transposed as petitioners in

¶51

the main original petition.

¶52

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

¶53

A No. 5369 of 2025

¶54

The other side have not seriously objected. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents / petitioners would submit that at the time of filing the original petition, the applicants have not co-operated for filing the petition for grant of letters of administration, thereby, the respondents / petitioners in the original petition have arrayed the applicants / respondents as parties to the petition. Now, if they have no objection to grant letters of administration, they may be transposed as petitioners in the main original petition.

¶55

This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on

¶56

record.

¶57

Considering the reasons stated in the affidavit and these applicants are also the legal heirs of the deceased and the Will was also executed in favour of the respondents 1 to 7 in the main petition. Now the applicants have filed the application to transpose the respondents 1 to 6, 8, 9, 13, 14 and 15 as petitioners 2 to 12 in the original petition. There are no reasons stated as to how the respondents 8, 9, 13 to 15 are related to the Will. As per the Will, only the respondents 1 to 7 are the parties. Therefore, it is appropriate to allow this application in part and the respondents 1 to 6 are ordered to be transposed as petitioners 2 to 7 in the main original petition.

¶58

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

¶59

A No. 5369 of 2025

¶60