PAPPAL Vs. PALANIAPPAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 1st respondent is the plaintiff in O.S.No.92 of 2012. The Revision Petitioners are the defendants 1, 4, 5, 7, 9 to 13. The 1st respondent, as plaintiff, filed the suit in O.S.No.92 of 2012 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Sankagiri, for partition and separate possession against petitioners herein and respondents 2 to 10. The said suit, after the completion of trial and when the matter is posted for arguments, at that time, the plaintiff/1st respondent had filed an application in I.A.471 of 2017 to send the 1st respondent and 2nd petitioner and 2nd respondent for DNA Test before the Dean, Government Mohan Kumara Mangalam Medical College Hospital, Salem, and to get the report from the expert.

(2.) The trial court, after hearing the arguments allowed the petition in I.A.No.471 of 2017. Challenging the said order, defendants 1, 4, 5, 7, 9 to 13/ Revision petitioners herein filed the present Civil Revision Petition.

(3.) The learned counsel for the Revision Petitioners would submit that Marimuthu gounder and his wife Pappal viz., father and mother of Petitioners 2 to 4 and respondents 2 and 3 died and since the father of the petitioner is no more, DNA test to the 1st respondent cannot be matched with the deceased Marimuthu gounder and further the first respondent/plaintiff filed the suit in the year 2012 and he has not taken any steps and after trial only, at the time of arguments, he has filed the petition only to drag on the proceedings.