R ANITHA Vs. RAMAKRISHNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT is brought to the notice of the Court that service of notice on the respondents 1 to 3 is pending. In order to avoid the avoidable delay and in view of the fact that the available materials would be suffice to give a disposal to this revision, the following order is made.

(2.) THIS revision has arisen from the order of the learned District Munsif dismissing an interlocutory application filed by the petitioners herein seeking for the impleadment of the respondents 4 to 7 herein as parties to the proceedings in I.A.No.1022 of 1995.

(3.) IN support of his contention, the learned counsel for the petitioners relied on a judgment of this Court reported in Swayamprakasam alias Chidambaranathan v. R.Vijayagrangam Swayamprakasam alias Chidambaranathan v. R.Vijayagrangam (1970)1 MLJ. 243 and rendered by His Lordship Justice R.Sadasivam, as he then was, wherein it was held as follows: