In partition suits, all co-sharers must be included, and failure to do so renders the suit maintainable only after necessary amendments.

O R D E R

The Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the I Additional Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in O.S.No.987 of 2014, dated 08.06.2023 dismissing the application filed by the deceased 1^st petitioner seeking rejection of the plaint.

2. The respondents herein field a suit for partition against the deceased 1^st petitioner. The deceased 1^st petitioner was the sole defendant in the suit. Pending revision, he died and his legal representatives were brought on record as petitioners 2 to 5. The respondents herein are the plaintiffs in the suit. For the sake of convenience, the parties are described as per their ranking in the suit.

3. According to the plaintiffs, the suit property originally belonged to one Marappa Gounder (Senior), father of the plaintiffs 1 to 3, Marathal, Palanathal and Lakshmi. The defendant is one of the brothers of the plaintiffs 1 to 3. They also have another brother by name Marappa Gounder (Junior). The plaintiffs 4 to 8 are the legal representatives of the deceased 1^st plaintiff-Marathal. As per the plaint averment, the properties are self- acquired properties of Senior Marappa Gounder and after his death, his five children are entitled to 1/5^th share each. Thus, plaintiffs 1, 2 and 3 are entitled to 1/5^th share each. The defendant and Junior Marappa are entitled to 1/5^th share each. It was claimed by the plaintiffs that after the death of Senior Marappa Gounder, the defendant and his brother Junior Marappa Gounder entered into a Partition on 08.06.1983, dividing the properties between themselves, without knowledge of the plaintiffs and therefore, a notice was issued to them demanding Partition.

4. Subsequently, a suit was filed in O.S.No.709 of 2012 before the III Additional Subordinate Court, Coimbatore against the defendant and the legal heirs of Junior Marappa Gounder. During pendency of the said suit, the legal heirs of Junior Marappa agreed to give share in the property to the plaintiffs and as per their demand, another one separate suit was filed in O.S.No.553 of 2014 against the legal heirs of Junior Marappa Gounder in respect of other part of the suit property and the said suit was compromised and based on the said settlement, the suit in O.S.No.709 of 2012 filed by the plaintiffs were not pressed. Even though the legal heirs of Junior Marappa Gounder admitted the plaintiffs right and agreed for partition, the present defendant evaded the request of the plaintiffs and hence, the present suit was filed seeking partition.

5. The deceased 1^st petitioner/defendant filed an application in I.A.No.1 of 2019 seeking to reject the plaint. It is the specific case of the defendant that the earlier suit filed by the plaintiffs in O.S.No.709 of 2012 was withdrawn based on the compromise and therefore, the present suit for partition on the same cause of action is not maintainable. It is the specific case of the defendant that the suit in O.S.No.553 of 2014 was filed by the plaintiffs only in respect of portion of the property allotted to Junior Marappa Gounder and against the legal heirs of Junior Marappa Gounder alone and the said suit was compromised and based on the said compromise, the first suit filed by the plaintiffs in O.S.No.709 of 2012 was withdrawn. By filing a suit in O.S.No.553 of 2014 in respect of the portion of the property allotted to Junior Marappa Gounder, the plaintiffs admitted earlier partition between the present defendant and his brother Junior Marappa Gounder. Therefore, they are estopped form reagitating the issue and relitigating the matter by fil