This civil revision petition is filed against the orders dated 23.07.2007 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Rajam in I.A.No.384 of 2006 in OS.No.41 of 2006.

2. The revision petitioners, who are the third parties to the suit before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Rajam filed I.A.No.384 of 2006 under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC contending that they are necessary parties to the suit filed by the respondents 1 and 2 against the respondent No.3 for partition and that they have to be impleaded as defendants in the suit. It was submitted by them in the said interlocutory application that unless they are impleaded as defendants, they will be deprived of their rights in the schedule mentioned properties and they will be subjected to multiplicity of litigation. After making an enquiry into the said I.A., the learned trial Court dismissed the same. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioners-third parties preferred the present revision petition.

3. I have heard the learned counsel• on record.

4. The respondents 1 and 2 claiming to be the sons of the respondent No.3 filed the suit for partition for division of the schedule mentioned properties which are said to be of Hindu Joint family into three equal share