Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
G.R.Swaminathan
Urumi Guruvappachetti, Urumi Rengnayagammal Trust – Appellant
Versus
Thangaraj – Respondent
ORDER :
G.R. Swaminathan, J.
The second defendant in O.S.No.670 of 2004 on the file of II Additional District Munsif Court, Trichirappalli is the revision petitioner herein.
2. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 10.02.2023 dismissing I.A.No.4 of 2022 in O.S.No.670 of 2004 filed by the revision petitioner and the others for transposing themselves as plaintiff in the suit.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner reiterated all the contentions setout in the grounds of revision and called upon this Court to set aside the impugned order and grand relief as prayed for.
4. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondent (second respondent) submitted that the impugned order is well reasoned and that it does not warrant interference.
5. I carefully considered the rival contentions and went through the materials on record.
6. O.S.No.670 of 2024 was filed by Thangaraj seeking permanent injunction against Raja @ Pandiarajan. The prayer in the suit was subsequently amended and the relief of mandatory injunction was also included and for recovery of possession was subsequently added. The case of the revision petitioner is that the sui
Transposition of parties in a suit may be allowed even if the plaintiff has not withdrawn the suit, to prevent multiplicity of proceedings and ensure justice.
Transposition of a defendant as a plaintiff under CPC requires the original plaintiff to withdraw or abandon the suit, ensuring no multiplicity of proceedings.
The main legal point established is that the transposition of a defendant as a plaintiff in a suit must fulfill the requirements under Order XXIII Rule 1-A of C.P.C, and the circumstances must warran....
Transposition as plaintiff – Trial Court has power to allow application for transposition of defendants as plaintiff, under its inherent power saved by Section 151 CPC.
A transposed plaintiff cannot change the entire cause of action; a fresh suit must be filed for new claims.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of commonality of interest for transposition under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, the implications of Order 41 Rule 22 and Rule 33 CPC, and t....
The discretion of the court to hear parties before transferring a case must be exercised judiciously in the context of the reason for transfer, and Section 24 CPC does not specifically require notice....
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
