Back
V. BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
Shanthi – Appellant
Versus
A. D. Rajagopal Naidu (Died) – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petitions are filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 06.12.2019 in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in O.S.No.1216 of 2019 on the file of the learned XVIII Additional City Civil Court, Chennai respectively)
Common Order:
1. Since the issues involved in both the petitions are one and the same, they are taken up together and a common order is being passed.
2. The present Civil Revision Petitions have been filed to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 06.12.2019 in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in O.S.No.1216 of 2019 on the file of the learned XVIII Additional City Civil Court, Chennai respectively.
3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:-
The petitioner in C.R.P.No.1493 of 2020 is the plaintiff and the petitioner in C.R.P.No.649 of 2020 is the defendant in O.S.No.1216 of 2019. The said suit has been filed for partition by dividing the suit schedule property into two equal shares by metes and bounds and allot one such share to the plaintiff, deliver possession of the same and to appoint an advocate commissioner to effect such division, if necessary and to direct the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.5,
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of joint family property and the necessity of impleading necessary or proper parties in a suit.
A third-party purchaser lacks the standing to raise the plea of partial partition in a suit for partition among co-owners, as this right is reserved for the co-owners themselves.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of impleading a party, especially a transferee pendente lite, in a partition suit to avoid multiplicity of suits and to effectively a....
The main legal principle established is that the Court has the discretion to add parties to a suit, with or without application, in order to effectively adjudicate and settle all the questions involv....
The court concluded that the issues of property nature and limitation are mixed law and fact, necessitating trial rather than dismissal under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC.
Parties cannot be added as defendants if the properties in question are not included as subject matter in the suit.
The court's decision emphasized that the points raised did not meet the criteria for rejection of the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 of C.P.C.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
