V.M. Velumani, J.

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the order and decreetal order, dated 27.04.2013, made in I.A. No.1056 of 2011 in O.S. No.299 of 2004, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Melur.

2. The petitioners are the plaintiffs 2 and 3 in O.S.No.299 of 2004 and the respondents 1 and 2 in I.A.No.1056 of 2011 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Melur. The respondents 1 to 6, who are third parties, are the petitioners in I.A.No.1056 of 2011. The respondents 7 and 8, who are the defendants 2 and 3, are the respondents 3 and 4 in the said I.A.

3. Facts of the case:

(i) Originally, on 19.02.1993 the first plaintiff - Mookammal @ Irulayee filed the suit in O.S.No.283 of 1983, before the II Additional Subordinate Court, Madurai, against the respondents 7 and 8 and one Krishnammal, one of the daughters of Amirtham Ammal, who is the one of the daughters of Amma Pillai @ Rakayee, for declaration and permanent injunction, by virtue of the Will, dated 24.03.1972, executed by Amma Pillai @ Rakkayee in favour of Mookammal @ Irulayee.

(ii) Pending suit, on 16.09.1993, the said Krishnammal, mother of the respondents 1 to 6, died and thereafter, on 20.01.2001, the first plaintiff Mokkammal @ Irulayee died. On 19.07.2002, the petitioners/plaintiffs 2 and 3 herein were brought on record as legal representatives of the deceased first plaintiff. The said Krishnammal, mother of the respondents 1 to 6 did not contest the suit and was set ex parte on 27.07.1993 and subsequently, on 16.09.1993, she died. Thereafter, the suit in O.S.No.283 of 1993 was transferred to the District Munsif Court, Madurai, and renumbered as O.S.No.221 of 1996. The first plaintiff - Mookammal @ Irulayee filed a Memo, dated 24.09.1997, to exonerate the first defendant from the suit. By order dated 26.09.1997, the said Krishnammal was exonerated and the suit was proceeded with. Thereafter, the suit in O.S.No.221 of 1996 was transferred to the II Additional Subordinate Court, Madurai, and renumbered as O.S.No.283 of 1996. One of the Attestors of the Will was examined as P.W.2. Subsequently, the suit in O.S.No.221 of 1996 was transferred to District Munsif Court, Melur, and renumbered as O.S.No.299 of 2004. On 17.09.2004, the defendants 2 and 3 were set ex parte and the suit was decreed. Thereafter, on 22.07.2005, I.A.No.197 of 2005 filed to set aside the ex parte decree was dismissed. On 06.03.2006, the ex parte decree was set aside in C.M.A.No.58 of 2005. Thereafter, P.Ws.3 and 4 were examined on the side of the plaintiffs. D.W.1 was examined on the side of the defendants 2 and 3. On 23.11.2010, I.A.Nos.241 and 242 of 2010 were filed to re-open the plaintiff's evidence and recall P.W.3 at the instance of the defendants 2 and 3 and the said applications were dismissed. On 24.03.2011, the matter was argued by the parties in full and written arguments were also filed. Thereafter, on 22.07.2011, the petition filed with a request to facilitate the defendants 2 and 3, for filing petitions for re-opening the defendants' evidence and recall D.W.1, was dismissed. Tr.O.P.No.42 of 2011, for transferring the suit was filed and the same was also dismissed.

(iii) On 24.11.2011, the respondents 1 to 6/legal heirs of the first defendant Krishnammal have filed I.A.No.1056 of 2011, for impleading themselves as parties in the suit. The respondents 1 to 6 contended that they are interested in the suit property and therefore, they are necessary and proper parties in the suit. The petitioners filed counter affidavit and contended that the respondents 1 to 6 are not necessary and proper parties and opposed the same. The petitioners submitted that only at the instigation of the respondents 7 and 8, who are defendants 2 and 3 in the suit, the respondents 1 to 6 have filed I.A.No.1056 of 2011, for impleading themselves as parties in the suit after 18 years of death of their mother. The mother of the respondents 1 to 6 did not contest the suit and she remained ex par