M.V. Muralidaran, J.

C.R.P. (PD) Nos. 2809 of 2010 is preferred challenging the order dated 27.03.2010 made in I.A.No.181 of 2008 in O.S.No.534/2005 on the file of the 2nd Additional District Munsif, Erode, transposing the 1st respondent herein (R. Manickam) as 2nd plaintiff in the suit upon the death of the original plaintiff.

2. C.R.P. (PD) No.2812 of 2011 is preferred challenging the order dated 23.03.2011 in I.A.No.125 of 2011 in O.S.No.760 of 2007 on the file of the 1st Additional District Munsif, Erode allowing the application to implead one Palaniswamy as 4th defendant in the suit.

3. C.R.P.(PD) Nos. 4225 to 4227 of 2013 are preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to strike off the respective plaints in O.S.No.534 of 2005 on the file of the 2nd Additional District Munsif, Erode), O.S.No.760 of 2007 on the file of the 1st Additional District Munsif, Erode) and O.S.No.28 of 2013 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Erode).

4. The following are the brief facts germane for the disposal of all the Civil Revision Petitions:

O.S.No.534 of 2005 was preferred by one Sadayammal seeking a decree for partition of the suit properties in to two and to allot and put her in separate possession of one share. Subsequently Manickam, the first respondent herein (1st defendant in that suit) was transposed as second plaintiff upon the death of the sole plaintiff Sadayammal.

5. O.S.No.760 of 2007 was preferred by Manickam, 1st Respondent herein seeking a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants therein from putting up any construction in the suit property till finality is attained in O.S.No.534 of 2005 etc. The defendants therein are petitioners 1 to 3 herein and according to the Plaintiff they are utter strangers having no right, title and interest in the suit property.

6. O.S. No. 28 of 2013 was preferred by Manickam, 1st Respondent herein seeking a declaratory decree declaring (i) that the sale deed dated 09-11.1994 executed by him in favour of defendants 5 to 10 in that suit as null and void, as it was obtained by fraud committed by Defendants 19 to 21 in that suit; (ii) the sale deed dated 16-12-2000 executed by defendants 5 to 10 in that suit to one Nachimuthu whose LRs are arrayed as defendant 26 to 29 in that suit, as null and void since defendant 5 to 10 therein do not get valid title based on the sale deed dated 09.11.1994; (iii) that the sale deed dated 21-11-2007 executed by defendants 12 & 13 to 23 in that suit through the 22nd defendant in that suit is not binding on the 1st Respondent herein as they have no title to the properties conveyed under the said sale deed and further (iv) seeking a partition decree in respect of the suit properties in to three shares and to allot and put him in separate possession of one share as alleged by Defendant No.19 therein; (v) seeking permanent injunction restraining first defendant therein from putting up any constructions in R.S.No.88/2 of Kumilanparappu Village; (vi) seeking mandatory injunction against the first defendant therein to remove constructions made in R.S.No.88/2 of Kumilanparappu village; and (vii) seeking permanent injunction restraining 34th defendant therein from effecting any service connection to the buildings constructed in R.S.No.88/2 of Kumillanparappu village.

7. The following dry lands comprised in R.S.No.81/7 of an extent of 1.59 acres; 0.22 Acres in R.S.No.81/11, 0.21 Acres in R.S.No.81/14, (corresponding Old S.F.Nos.60/C, D, E, F, I, J & K & 61/A, B & C) in all totally measuring 2.02 acres situate at Kumilamparappu Village, Erode Taluk were joint family properties of S. Ramasamy Nadar. The said S. Ramasamy Nadar died on 24.06.1981 leaving behind his wife (Sadayammal), sons (i) R. Rangasamy, (ii) R. Ponnusamy @ Palaniappan @ Palanichamy and (iii) R.Manickam and a daughter Muthayammal as his legal heirs. It is stated that R. Kuppusamy eldest son of S. Ramasamy Nadar predeceased his father as bachelor.

8. It is stated tha