S T RAJALAKSHMI Vs. LOKESH S T

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter came up for preliminary hearing 'B' Group on 05.01.2018 and Miss Varsha R. Iyengar, learned counsel for the petitioners was heard in full, none appears for the respondent. In order to give one more opportunity, Court has directed to post the matter next week. Again, when the matter was posted on 12.01.2018, Court directed to post the matter next week. Again, on 19.01.2018, though case called twice, none appears for the respondent. In order to give one more opportunity, finally, one week's time was granted to the learned counsel for the respondent to address his arguments, failing which the matter would be heard on the next date of hearing on behalf of the petitioners. Even though, on two occasions, time was granted for the respondent's counsel to appear and argue, none appears for the respondent. Therefore, this Court has no option except to proceed with the hearing of the counsel for the petitioners.

(2.) The legal representatives of the original plaintiff filed the present writ petition against the order dated 29.08.2015 on I.A. No.5 made in O.S. No.236/2009 rejecting the application filed by the legal representatives of the original plaintiff under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure.

(3.) The mother of the plaintiffs Smt. Susheelamma originally filed a suit in O.S. No.236/2009 against the defendant (son) for declaration of title and permanent injunction contending that the suit schedule property belongs to the plaintiff who purchased under the registered Sale Deed dated 26.07.1974 out of her own earnings and it is her selfacquired property. The defendant has no manner of right, title and interest in the suit schedule property. Hence, plaintiff filed a suit. During the pendency of the suit, the original plaintiff-Smt. Sushelamma died. Therefore present petitioners who are the legal representatives were brought on record.