Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.
Jude Prathap - Appellant
Versus
Bavani Rani - Respondent
C.R.P.(MD).No.307 of 2019 and CMP(MD).No.1476 of 2019
Decided on : 10-07-2024
Key Points: - Pendente lite purchasers from a co-owner in partition suits are necessary parties for adjudication of rights. (!) (!) - A sale executed after the expiration of an interim injunction is valid and is subject to the final outcome of the suit. (!) (!) - The revision petition allowed; the trial court’s order to implead the proposed party is set aside and the proposed party is directed to be impleaded as a party defendant. (!) (!) - The court found that the sale was not void merely for being after injunction expiration, and that pendente lite purchasers’ presence is essential for proper adjudication. (!) (!) (!) - The legal heirs of deceased plaintiffs need not be impleaded as a precondition to the impleading petition; however, the court subsequently impleaded the legal heirs of the deceased plaintiff in this proceeding. (!)
ORDER :
PRAYER: The Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to call for the records relating to the fair and decreetal order passed in I.A.No.519 of 2017 in O.S.No.339 of 2017 dated 12.10.2018 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Tiruchendur and set aside the same by allowing this Civil Revision Petition.
The present civil revision petition has been filed by a third party to O.S.No.399 of 2017 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Tiruchendur challenging the dismissal of his application to implead himself in the suit as a party defendant.
(A) Facts leading to the filing of this revision petition are as follows:
2. The respondents 1 to 7 herein as plaintiffs had filed the above said suit on 23.07.2013 as against the respondents 8 to 10 in the revision petition for the relief of partition of their 7/10th share and separate possession. They have further prayed for the relief of permanent injunction as against the first defendant and his men from in any encumbering the suit schedule properties are allotted to the share of the plaintiffs.
3. Along with the suit, the plaintiffs had filed I.A.No.637 of 2013 seeking interim injunction as against the first defendant and his men and agents from in any way encumbering the suit schedule properties. An order of exparte injunction was granted on 23.07.2013 till 07.08.2013. Since summons were not served upon the first defendant, a fresh notice was ordered on 07.08.2013 and the injunction application was adjourned to 21.08.2013 after extending the injunction order. On 21.08.2013, again a fresh notice was issued to the first respondent and after extending the injunction order, it was adjourned to 11.09.2013. On 11.09.2013, again a fresh notice was ordered to the first defendant and after extending the injunction order, it was adjourned to 19.09.2013.
4. On 19.09.2013, the injunction order was extended till 23.10.2013. On 23.10.2013, it was adjourned to 13.11.2013 for substituted service batta for the first defendant. On 13.11.2013 batta was paid for R1 and thereafter, it was adjourned to 14.11.2013 without extending the injunction order. On 27.11.2013, the first defendant in the suit had sold the suit schedule properties to the revision petitioner/proposed party. The purchaser had filed I.A.No.519 of 2017 on 13.12.2017 to implead himself in the said suit as a party defendant. The said application was dismissed by the trial Court on the following grounds:
(b) When an order of interim injunction not to encumber the property was operating as against the first defendant, in violation of the said order, the proposed party had purchased the suit schedule properties. Therefore, he is not a necessary party.
(c) The suit for partition has been filed on 23.07.2013 and the proposed party had purchased the suit schedule property from the first defendant on 27.11.2013. Therefore, the proposed party being a pendente lite purchaser is not entitled to get himself impleaded in the suit.
(d) The fifth plaintiff had passed away on 15.07.2015. Without impleading the legal heirs of the fifth plaintiff, the present application has been filed in I.A.No. 519 of 2017. Therefore, the impleading application is liable to be dismissed.
(e) The suit properties now sold by the first defendant may also be allotted to the share of the first defendant in the partition suit. Therefore, the presence of the petitioner is not essential for deciding the issues involved in the suit.
5. Challenging the dismissal of the above said impleading application, the present revision petition has been filed by the proposed party to the above said suit.
(B) Contentions of the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the revision petitioner are as follows:
6. The fourth plaintiff in the suit has lodged a complaint before the Superintendent of Police, Tuticorin on 15.07.2013
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.
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 ....
The court affirmed that a purchaser pendente lite is a necessary party in ongoing litigation to ensure all parties with legitimate interests are heard.
In a suit for partition of property, all the members of the family, who have interest and claim over the joint family properties are required to be impleaded. However, if the plaintiff is not claimin....
The court's discretion to implead a third party as a defendant in a partition suit after the passing of a preliminary decree is guided by factors such as whether the third party's rights are affected....
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
