Back
K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI
Karuppaiyan – Appellant
Versus
Sudhakar – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the order of allowing of I.A.No.109 of 2022 in O.S.No. 21 of 2008 on the file of the 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, (PCR), Thanjavur, dated 09.01.2023.)
1. This civil revision petition is filed against the order, dated 09.01.2023 passed in I.A.No.109 of 2022 in O.S.No.21 of 2008 by the 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, (PCR), Thanjavur.
2. According to the revision petitioner/plaintiff, he filed a suit in O.S.No.21 of 2008 before the I Additional District and Sessions Court, (PCR), Thanjavur, for passing of a preliminary decree for partition in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant allotting ½ share in the suit properties to the plaintiff by metes and bounds and also to pass a final decree in terms of preliminary decree. During the pendency of the said suit, the first respondent/third party filed a petition in I.A.No.109 of 2022 under Order 20 Rule 18 of C.P.C., praying for an order to allot the property in S.No.180/4B measuring 55 cents (Schedule 17) to him and to set aside the preliminary decree in which the above property was wrongly allotte
Point of law : Suit for partition - In the absence of any details given by the respondents/defendants, and subsequent purchasers may be proper parties and their presence is required only at the time ....
An application to amend the plaint is maintainable even after passing of the preliminary decree, since the suit is not terminated and proceedings are continuous.
Pendente lite purchasers from co-owners are necessary parties in partition suits, and sales executed after the expiration of interim injunctions are valid and subject to the suit's outcome.
Third parties in a partition suit can resist the execution of the decree by filing suitable applications under Order 21 Rule 97 read with Section 47 of CPC.
The transferee or subsequent purchaser can maintain an application under Order I Rule 10 of CPC, and misquoting the provision of law cannot be a ground for rejecting the application.
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.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the discretionary power of the court to allow necessary amendments to pleadings for effective adjudication and to avoid multiplicity of proceedings....
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
