VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2023 › High Court of Madras

Manichi v. M. Maniyan,

DISMISSED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
3 July 2023
Bench
S Justice K. Govindarajan Thilakavadiauthor
Case no.
CRP(MD) 1535/2023

Judgment

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 03.07.2023 CORAM

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI and C.M.P(MD) Nos.7564 & 7565 of 2023

1.Manichi

2.Pushbam

3.Karuppaiah

4.Arumugam ... Petitioners in both C.R.Ps. Vs. M.Maniyan ... Respondent in both C.R.Ps. Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to call for the records of the Fair and Executable orders dated

21.12.2022 passed in I.A.No.04 of 2022 in I.A.No.2 of 2020 in O.S.No.165 of 2020 and in I.A.No.05 of 2022 in O.S.No.165 of 2020 respectively, on the files of the Sub Court, Aruppukottai and set aside the same. For Petitioners in both C.R.Ps. : Mr.I.Suthakaran Page No. 1 of 6 C O M M O N O R D E R By this common order, both the Civil Revision Petitions are being disposed of.

¶2These Civil Revision Petitions are preferred by the defendants against the impugned orders dated 21.12.2022 passed in I.A.No.04 of 2022 in I.A.No.2 of 2020 in O.S.No.165 of 2020 and in I.A.No.05 of 2022 in O.S.No.165 of 2020 respectively, on the files of the Sub Court, Aruppukottai.

¶3According to the revision petitioners, I.A.Nos.4 & 5 of 2022 were filed by the respondent/plaintiff under Order 6 Rules 17 & 18 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to carry out the amendment in respect of averments made in the I.A.No.2 of 2020 and in the plaint.

¶4The learned Trial Judge, after considering the affidavits filed by the respondent/plaintiff and the counter affidavit filed by the revision petitioners/defendants, allowed the said I.As. in favour of the respondent/plaintiff for carrying out the necessary amendments in I.A.No.2 of 2020 as well as in the plaint. Page No. 2 of 6

¶5Aggrieved by these impugned orders, the present Civil Revision Petitions are preferred by the revision petitioners/defendants stating that the amendments sought for by the respondent/plaintiff with regard to the age of the respondent/plaintiff as well the revision petitioners/defendants are without any evidence and it is only an afterthought.

¶6It is submitted that the revision petitioners/defendants have taken a specific defense in their Written Statement stating that the respondent/plaintiff cannot be a member of the society, through which, he claims title to the suit schedule property, for the reason that at that point of time, the respondent/plaintiff was a minor. However, the learned Trial Judge has given a finding in favour of the respondent/plaintiff to amend the age of the parties in I.A.No.2 of 2020 as well as in the plaint without any proof to substantiate the same. The amendments sought for by the respondent/plaintiff is only an afterthought and the learned Trial Judge has simply allowed the same without any proof of age and therefore, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside.

¶7Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioners/defendants and perused the records. Page No. 3 of 6

¶8On going through both the impugned orders passed by the learned Trial Judge in I.A.No.04 of 2022 in I.A.No.2 of 2020 in O.S.No.165 of 2020 and in I.A.No.05 of 2022 in O.S.No.165 of 2020, it is noticed that the learned Trial Judge has observed that at the time of trial, the contention of the parties can be agitated on the basis of evidence put forth by the respective parties. The decision of the learned Trial Judge is well reasoned and does not require for any interference. Therefore, the present Civil Revision Petitions are liable to be dismissed.

¶9The revision petitioners/defendants are at liberty to file their additional written statement stating all their contentions raised in these Civil Revision Petitions and also to let in evidence in this regard. Based on which, the Trial Court can frame additional issues and decide the same on merits.

¶10Accordingly, both these Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed. No cost. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

03.07.2023 NCC :Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Index: Yes/ No jen Page No. 4 of 6 To The Sub Court, Aruppukottai. Page No. 5 of 6 C.R.P.rMi)oNos.15a5o&o15a6oofo202a K.GOVINDARAJANoTHILAKAVADI,oJ. jen C.R.P.(MD)oNos.1535o&o1536oofo2023 and C.M.P(MD)oNos.7564o&o7565oofo2023

03.07.2023 PageoNo.o6oofo6

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.