N.Basker, v. P. Hemalatha

Madras HC6 Nov 2025CMP/27110/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Leave granted to non-impleaded third parties claiming co-ownership to challenge collusive partition decree obtained before Lok Adalat in O.S.No.627 of 2018 (I Additional Subordinate Court, Salem); CMP No.27110 of 2025 in CRP SR No.138340 of 2025; Madras High Court; Justice P.B. Balaji; dated 06-11-2025; counsel S.Sathiyanarayanan; respondents led by P. Hemalatha.

What did the court decide?

Leave granted to the petitioners/appellants to challenge the judgment and decree in O.S.No.627 of 2018 (decree obtained before the Lok Adalat). ¶¶24

N.Basker, Vs P. Hemalatha — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

CMP NO. 27110 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 06-11-2025

¶2

CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI

¶4

CMP NO. 27110 of 2025 in CRP SR No.138340 of 2025

¶5

N.Basker,

¶6

S/o.A.Nagalingam, 12, Vivekanandapuram, Opp. To SPMM Hospital, Ammapet, Salem -636 003. and 2 Others

¶7

Appellant(s)

¶8

¶9

P. Hemalatha, W/o.Sakthivel, residing at D.No.1, Pillaiyar Kovil Street, Bommidi, Harur Taluk, Dharmapuri District. and 3 Others

¶10

Respondent(s)

¶11

For Appellant(s): S.Sathiyanarayanan

¶12

For Respondent(s):

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Heard Mr.S.Sathiyanarayanan, learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶15

The petitioners are third parties to the suit in O.S.No.627 of 2018 on

¶16

the file of I Additional Subordinate Court, Salem. The contention of the

¶17

petitioners is that the petitioners are co-owners having substantial right and interest in the properties and without impleading them as parties, a partition suit has been filed in the absence of the petitioners, a collusive decree has

¶18

P.B.BALAJI.,J

¶19

1/2

¶20

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

¶21

¶22

been obtained before the Lok Adalat and the same is sought to be challenged by the revision petitioners.

¶23