CRP No. 1784 of 2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Reserved on : 28.07.2022

Delivered On : 27.01.2023

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP

Civil Revision Petition No.1784 of 2021

and

C.M.P.No.13840 of 2021

1. V.Muthulakshmi

2. V.Anbazhagan

3. V.Ilango

.. Petitioners

Versus

1. Venkatachalam

2. Saroja

3. Kayalvizhi

4. Adimoolam

5. Gunasekaran

6. A.Manvizhi

7. K.Thenmozhi

.. Respondents

Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code,

against the Order and decree dated 05.06.2021 made in I.A.No.292 of 2020 in

O.S.No.79 of 2012 on the file of learned III Additional District Judge,

Puducherry.

For Petitioners

:

Mr. D.Ravichander

For Respondents

:

Mr. I. Abrar Md. Abdullah

ORDER

1/16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

CRP No. 1784 of 2021

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the Order and decree

dated 05.06.2021 made in I.A.No.292 of 2020 in O.S.No.79 of 2012 on the file

of learned III Additional District Judge, Puducherry.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as

"Plaintiffs" and "Defendants" as has been arrayed in the suit.

3. The Revision Petitioners are the Plaintiffs before the Trial Court.

They have filed the suit in O.S. No. 79 of 2012 on the file of the learned III

Additional District Judge, Puducherry for the following reliefs:-

“a) Declaration that the Plaintiffs 2 and 3 are the only forced heirs

of the first Defendant;

b) Declaration that the gratuitous dispositions made by the first

Defendant are not binding on them and the first Defendant has no

absolute right of transferring the properties in favour of others and such

transfers if at all could be valid, can be valid only to the extent of 1/8^th

share as far as gratuitous dispositions are concerned;

c) Declaration that the first Plaintiff is entitled to ½ equal share of

interest in the properties described in the “B” & “C” schedule of the

Plaint;

d) Decree of Permanent Injunction restraining the Defendants 1 to

2/16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

CRP No. 1784 of 2021

5 their men and agents or any one claiming under them not to encumber

the suit properties in any manner either by was of alienation, mortgage,

lease or in any manner whatsoever without the consent of the Plaintiffs;

e) Direct the Defendants to pay the cost of the Suit;

f) and to pass such other relief as this Hon'ble Court may deem it

and necessary in the circumstances of the case.”

4. As per the plaint averments, the first Defendant is the husband of the

first Plaintiff. The Plaintiffs 2 and 3 are the children born out of the wedlock

between the first Plaintiff and first Defendant. The 6th and 7th Defendants are

daughters born out of the wedlock between the first Plaintiff and first

Defendant. According to the Plaintiffs, A Schedule Property described in the

plaint belongs to the mother-in-law of the first Defendant. The B and C

Schedule Properties were purchased out of the income derived out of A

Schedule property by the first Defendant. The Plaintiffs and Defendants are

natives of Pondicherry and are governed by the Coromandal Customary

Hindu Law applicable to Hindus in Pondicherry. As per the Coromandal Law,

the Plaintiffs 2 and 3, being the sons are the only lawful heirs. In other words,

they are the forced heirs of the first Defendant and the first Plaintiff, having

the right of legitim. However, the Defendants 3 to 5 claims to be the children

born out of the illicit relationship between the first and second Defendant. The

3/16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

CRP No. 1784 of 2021

Defendants 3 to 5 were never recognised or acknowledged by the first

Defendant at any point of time. As per Coromandal Coast of Pondicherry and

applicable laws, a Hindu father or Hindu mother who has an apparent heir

cannot make any alienation of his or her properties unless there is absolute

leg