T.SETHUPATHI NADAR Vs. ALAMELU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of The Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 05.10.2016 passed by the learned V Additional District Judge, Coimbatore, refusing to reject the plaint in O.S.No.618 of 2015 and thereby dismissing the application of the petitioner in I.A.No.119 of 2016 filed under Order VII, Rule 11 of CPC.

(2.) The respondent is the sole plaintiff and the petitioners are defendants in the suit. The suit has been filed for a preliminary decree for partition of the suit properties into four equal shares and allotment of one such share to the plaintiff by metes and bounds and with reference to good and bad soil and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from alienating or from creating any encumbrance in the suit schedule property.

(3.) Pending suit, the defendants filed an application under Order VII, Rule 11 of CPC which is under revision seeking to reject the plaint. The above application was filed on the ground that the 1st item of the suit schedule properties originally belonged to one Thavasimuthu Nadar. He had four sons including the 1st defendant. The said Thavasimuthu Nadar had partitioned the properties as per the registered partition deed dated 15.02.1954 and in the partition, the properties described under D-schedule were allotted to the 1st defendant. As per the above registered partition deed, the 1st defendant is only a life estate holder and his male issues, the defendants 2 and 3 are the vested reminders and the 1st defendant is not having any absolute right over the properties allotted to him in the partition. It is also specifically mentioned in the partition deed that after the demise of the 1st defendant, the properties would devolve upon the defendants 2 and 3 being the male descendants. In such circumstances, the plaintiff has no right whatsoever in the suit properties.