1. The arguments advanced by Mr.K.S.Sankhar Murali, learned counsel for the petitioner and by Mr.A.Edwin Prabakar, learned counsel for the first respondent are heard.

2. The first defendant in the Original Suit in O.S.No.81 of 2011 is the petitioner in the Civil Revision Petition. The suit was filed by the first respondent herein for the following reliefs:

"(a) Dissolution of partnership;

(b) Rendition of accounts; and

(c) Equal distribution of the assets of the partnership."

All those prayers have been made based on another prayer that a deed of retirement from partnership dated 19.05.2010 was null and void and that the said document should be declared null and void. Of course, while framing the suit, the prayers for the other reliefs had been placed above the prayer for the relief of declaration of the deed of retirement to be null and void. Such a defect shall be only in the form and it cannot be stated to be a material defect to assume that the earlier prayers were not based on the subsequent prayer.

3. The first defendant, viz., the petitioner in the Civil Revision Petition, after entering appearance and filing a written statement in the suit in O.S.No.81 of 2011, c