B.Ramaiah, Vs Mehar Banu — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

B.Ramaiah, Vs Mehar Banu — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

CMP(MD) NO. 190 of 2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17-03-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI

CMP(MD) NO. 190 of 2026

IN S.A.(MD)No.116 of 2024

1. B.Ramaiah,

Son of Balasubramanian Door No.1/889 Sait Ibrahim Nagar Ramanathapuram District Collector Officer Post Ramanathapuram.

Petitioner(s)

Vs

Mehar Banu Wife of Ameerkhan East Street Sathankulam Village Ramanathapuram Taluk.

Ahamed Bazeer Son of late Seeni Abdul Door No.4/625 East Street Sathankulam Village Ramanathapuram Taluk.

Aluvudeen Son of late Seeni Abdul Door No.4/625 East Street Sathankulam Village Ramanathapuram Taluk. Represented through his power agent Aamina

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

Wife of Alavudeen Door No.4/625 East Street Sathankulam Village Ramanathapuram Taluk.

Hamitha Banu Wife of Ahamed Bazeer Door No.4/625 East Street Sathankulam Village Ramanathapuram Taluk Ramanathapuram District. (Notice to the first respondent may be dispensed with)

Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s):

J. Barathan R. Raja Abdul Hameed A

For Respondent(s):

No appearance for R2 & R3

Prayer:

To pass an order impleading the fourth respondent/proposed party in the main second appeal in S.A.(MD) No. 116 of 2024 and array her as the fourth respondent and thus render justice.

ORDER

Heard Mr.J.Barathan, learned Counsel for the petitioner / appellant.

2. I have also gone through the affidavit filed in support of the petition

seeking impleadment of the fourth respondent as the fourth respondent in the Second Appeal.

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

3.

3. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the suit is one for

declaration. Despite serving notice on the respondents in the Second Appeal, they have not chosen to appear either in person or through Counsel and since the appellant has come to know about the settlement deed in favour of the proposed respondent, the appellant seeks impleadment of the settlee, who claims under the settlement deed, which is subject to the doctrine of lis pendence.

4. I am satisfied that the fourth respondent would be a necessary party,

especially since the respondents 1 to 3 who have no subsisting interest, have already settled the property in favour of the fourth respondent, who is now proposed to be impleaded as fourth respondent in the Second Appeal. Accordingly, this petition is allowed.

5. Registry is directed to carry out necessary amendments.

17-03-2026

MR

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

To

Mehar Banu Wife of Ameerkhan East Street Sathankulam Village Ramanathapuram Taluk.

Ahamed Bazeer Son of late Seeni Abdul Door No.4/625 East Street Sathankulam Village Ramanathapuram Taluk.

Aluvudeen Son of late Seeni Abdul Door No.4/625 East Street Sathankulam Village Ramanathapuram Taluk. Represented through his power agent Aamina Wife of Alavudeen Door No.4/625 East Street Sathankulam Village Ramanathapuram Taluk.

Hamitha Banu Wife of Ahamed Bazeer Door No.4/625 East Street Sathankulam Village Ramanathapuram Taluk Ramanathapuram District.

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