RAJESWARI AMMAL Vs. P.KANNIAPPAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By an order, dated 08.01.2020 made in M.P.Nos.1,2 and 3 of 2011 in this Civil Revision Petition, one Mr.Nadanavelu is ordered to be impleaded as legal heir of the sole revision petitioner and in the subsequent hearings, it was brought to my knowledge that there was a suppression of material facts regarding the counter filed in the miscellaneous petitions. After perusing the counter filed in the said MPs and also taking note of the fact that the alleged legalheirship of the said Nadanavelu as the legal heir of the deceased original revision petitioner/Rajeswari Ammal is subject matter of the CRP.151 of 2010.

(2.) It is to be stated that after hearing both sides, namely, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the respondent, respondent Kanniappan died and LR application had been filed. After hearing the rival parties, the original respondent herein filed the suit in O.S.No.5478 of 1995 on the file of the XVII-Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai, against the Revision Petitioner, praying for permanent injunction to not to interfere with her present physical condition of the suit schedule property and the matter was posted for cross examination of PW.1 on 17.12.2003. As there was a dilatory tactics to drag on the proceedings, the trial Court recording the reasons has allowed the suit exparte and hence the said Rajeswari Ammal filed I.A.No.23649 of 2003 seeking to set aside the exparte decree and the same was dismissed on 21.02.2004. Aggrieved by the said order of dismissal, dated 21.02.2004, a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in |C.M.A.No.85 of 2005 was preferred which also got dismissed on 30.03.2007 and hence this Civil Revision Petition.

(3.) Heard both side counsels and perused the records.