Prima facie evidence is essential to add or delete properties at the final decree stage in a partition suit.

1. Heard both the sides. The germane facts absolutely necessary for the disposal of these Civil Revision Petitions would run thus:

Originally, the suit in O.S.No.74 of 2008 was filed for partition, whereupon preliminary decree was passed as against which an appeal was preferred before the High Court and in the appeal, judgment was pronounced on 22.11.2011 prescribing certain time limit for disposal of the final decree proceedings. Thereafter, it appears that before the Lower Court, the I.A.No.267 of 2012 was filed by the revision petitioners/plaintiffs to permit them to amend the final decree petition as per the particulars given in the petition. Similarly, the I.A.No.268 of 2012 was filed by the seventh and eighth defendants to add certain properties which have been left out in the 'A' schedule property and to delete some properties after the Court Commissioner pointed out the same. After hearing both the sides, the Lower Court dismissed both the applications on the main ground that in as much as a time limit has been fixed by the High Court, entertaining of those two petitions would further protract the proceedings; there was no sufficient evidence to hold that such properties should be added or that certain other properties should be deleted at the final decree stage; and that amendment of survey numbers also would lead to further complications. With the aforesaid findings, the Lower Court dismissed both the applications.

2. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the orders passed by the Lower Court, the present Civil Revision Petitions have been focussed on various grounds.

3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioners/plaintiffs would pyramid his arguments which could succinctly and precisely bet set out thus:

During the final decree proceedings, when the Commissioner visited the suit properties and started surveying them with the help of a surveyor and the revenue officials, with reference to revenue records and also in the presence of all the parties concerned, certain new facts came to the knowledge of the plaintiffs and some of the defendants, that certain properties were left out accidentally and certain other properties were wrongly included in the schedule of the plaint and in respect of some other properties, the sub-division numbers were not properly specified. Whereupon, those two applications were filed by the respective parties, but the Lower Court, without considering the importance of those applications, simply dismissed them warranting interference in revision.

4. The learned counsel for the defendants 7 and 8 would virtually support the arguments of the learned counsel for the revision petitioners. Similarly, the learned counsel for the defendants 3, 4 and 6 also would support the arguments of the learned counsel for the revision petitioners.

5. Whereas, the learned counsel for Azhagar-D3 would oppose and challenge the arguments as put forth by the learned counsel for the plaintiffs on the main ground that the revision petitioners/plaintiffs and D7 and D8, at their whims and fancies cannot try to get new properties included and also get certain properties deleted from the schedule. The Lower Court correctly observed that at the final decree proceedings, this sort of additions and deletions and carrying out amendments would lead to a murky situation.

6. The point for consideration is as to whether there is any perversity or illegality in the order of the Lower Court.

7. What I could glean and discern from the perusal of the records and submissions of both the sides, is that when the Advocate Commissioner visited the suit property with the help of revenue officials, surveyor and started identifying the suit properties in the presence of the parties concerned, certain new facts came to limelight. As correctly pointed out by the learned counsel for the plaintiffs, because vast extents of properties are involved in this case, the parties were not sedulous and meticulous in adhering to the