Defendant permitted additional Written Statement to claim exclusive property ownership in partition suit despite trial commencement.

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition is filed to set aside the order dated

17.07.2025 passed in I.A.No.2 of 2025 in O.S.No.13 of 2012, on the file of the District Judge, Nilgiris District, at Udhagamandalam (now pending on the file of the Nilgiris District, Family Court, Udhagamandalam and renumbered as O.S.No.13 of 2025).

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the 1^st respondent/plaintiff has filed the suit for partition seeking to pass a preliminary decree as he is entitled to 7/36 share in the suit properties. In the suit, the plaintiff had deliberately included the personal properties of the 2^nd defendant/petitioner herein which will have to be pleaded as exclusive property of the 2^nd defendant/petitioner herein. Hence, the petitioner wants to file additional Written Statement before the Trial Court to plead that the suit properties included by the plaintiff in the suit schedule property are the absolute property of the petitioner/2nd defendant by virtue of the Will, Settlement Deed and Sale Deed. Further, even though the Written Statement has been filed by the petitioner/2nd defendant along with the 3^rd defendant, the properties owned by the 2^nd defendant are not pleaded therein since the instruction given by the 2^nd defendant have not been suitably transmitted in the Written Statement. The Trial Court without considering the aforesaid facts, wrongly dismissed I.A. No.2 of 2025 in O.S. No.13 of 2012 holding that the 2^nd Defendant/petitioner herein has filed the Written Statement along with 3^rd defendant and adopted the Additional Written Statement filed by the 3^nd defendant twice and after commencement of Trial, he is not entitled to file the Additional Written Statement for the 3^rd time. Hence, he seeks to set aside the order dated 17.07.2025 made in I.A. No.2 of

2025 passed by the Trial Court.

3. Per contra, the learned counsel for the 3^rd and 4^th respondents have raised objections that the petitioner/2nd defendant jointly had filed his Written Statement along with the 3^rd defendant and hence, he is not entitled to file the Additional Written Statement after framing of issues and commencement of Trial. Further, the petitioner has filed the said application to drag on the Trial proceedings. Hence, the Civil Revision Petition is liable to be set aside.

4. Heard both sides and perused the material available on record.

5. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, it is seen that the suit has been filed for partition seeking to pass preliminary decree for his share. However, the 2^nd defendant wants to file his additional Written Statement individually since his own properties obtained by way of Will, Settlement Deed and Sale Deed, have been included in the suit schedule properties. In order to prove his ownership in the suit schedule property, the 2^nd defendant has to be given sufficient opportunity. Hence, this Court is inclined to permit him to file his Additional Written Statement before the Trial Court by setting aside the order dated 17.07.2025 made in I.A. No.2 of 2025 in O.S. No.13 of 2012 passed by the Trial Court and further, he would not be allowed to file any other applications with the intention to drag on the proceedings. The Trial Court is hereby directed to dispose of the suit in O.S. No.13 of 2012 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.