Third-party purchaser sought to invoke Sections 3 and 4 of Partition Act within final decree proceedings of a partition suit to which he was not a party. The High Court held those provisions benefit only shareholders or family members who are parties to the suit, upheld return of the application and dismissed the revision petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
C.R.P.(MD)No.2184 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 06.08.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
C.R.P(PD)(MD)No.2184 of 2025
Mohammed Ali
... Petitioner(s)
Vs.
C.R.P.(MD)No.2184 of 2025
... Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to direct the learned Subordinate Judge, Sankarankoil to take on the petitioner s application filed under section 3 and 4 of the Partition Act r/w section 151 of CPC in unnumbered IA SR No.8555 of 2024 in IA No.334 of 2010 in OS No.56 of 2008 on the file of the Learned Subordinate Judge, Sankarankoil and the same may be taken on file and allow the Civil Revision Petition.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Sasi Kumar
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition is filed seeking a direction to direct the learned Subordinate Judge, Sankarankoil, to take on the petitioner's application filed under sections 3 and 4 of the Partition Act read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in unnumbered I.A.SR.No.8555 of 2024 in I.A.No.334 of 2010 in O.S.No.56 of 2008, on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Sankarankoil and to allow the Civil Revision Petition.
2. Since no adverse order is going to be passed as against the respondents, notice to them is dispensed with.
3. The first respondent filed the suit for partition as against the other respondents in O.S.No.56 of 2008 and the said suit was decreed in their favour 2/6
C.R.P.(MD)No.2184 of 2025
by a preliminary decree in the year 2009. The petitioner had already purchased
that the final decree proceedings were pending before the trial Court in I.A.No. 334 of 2010. Immediately thereafter, the petitioner filed unnumbered interlocutory application in the year 2024 under Sections 3 and 4 of the Partition Act, seeking alienation of the remaining two shares in his favour. However, the said application was returned by the trial Court. Aggrieved by the said return order, the present civil revision petition has been filed by the petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in terms of Sections 3 and 4 of the Partition Act, where any other shareholder applies for leave to buy at a valuation the share or shares of the party or parties asking for a sale, the Court shall order a valuation of the share or shares in such manner as it may think fit and offer to sell the same to such shareholder at the price so
ascertained. Further, as per Section 4 of the Act, where a share in a dwelling house belonging to an undivided family has been transferred to a person who is not a member of such family and such transferee sues for partition, the Court shall, if any member of the family being a shareholder shall undertake to buy the share of such transferee. However, the trial Court, without properly 3/6
C.R.P.(MD)No.2184 of 2025
considering the above legal provisions, returned the unnumbered application filed by the petitioner, which is not sustainable. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the writ petition.
7. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has preferred an appeal in A.S.No.12 of 2023, which is pending on the file of the Sub-Court, Sankarankoil. In the meantime, the petitioner has filed an unnumbered interlocutory application before the trial Court in the pending final decree proceedings, invoking Sections 3 and 4 of the Partition Act. However, the said provisions are not applicable to the petitioner, as he is not a member of the undivided family or a co-sharer in the partition suit. The benefit under Sections
4/6
C.R.P.(MD)No.2184 of 2025
3 and 4 of the Partition Act is available only to the shareholders or family
members who are parties to the suit and not to the third parties.
8. While a third party may have the right to file an independent suit for partition or title, he cannot invoke the provisions of the Partition Act within the final decree proceedings of a suit to which he is not a party. Therefore, the return of the unnumbered interlocutory application by the trial Court is justified and does not warrant any interference by this Court.
9. Accordingly, the civil revision petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
06.08.2025
Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes / No PKN
To
1.The Learned Subordinate Judge, Sankarankoil.
2 .The Section Officer, Vernacular Records, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
C.R.P.(MD)No.2184 of 2025
M.DHANDAPANI,J.
PKN
C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.2184 of 2025
06.08.2025
6/6
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a third party to a partition suit can invoke Sections 3 and 4 of the Partition Act in pending final decree proceedings.
Whether the trial Court's return of the unnumbered application warranted interference.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Mohammed Ali
Asan Kani
Peer Mohammed
Fathima Beevi
Subaithal Beevi
Sowral Beevi
M.Dhandapani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
