SARAVANAVELU Vs. PAZHANIYANDI(DIED) AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These civil revision petitions are directed against the order dated 29.1.2010 passed by the I Additional Subordinate Judge, Cuddalore, in I.A.Nos.248 and 249 of 2008 in O.S.No.17 of 1991.

(2.) The petitioner is the second plaintiff in O.S.No.17 of 1991. He along with one Mr.Palaniandi(now deceased), had filed the suit against one Kulandaivelu and seven others for partition and separate possession of the suit properties. One Mangan was the owner of the suit properties. He had three sons, namely, (i)Rathinam, (ii)Muthukumarasami and (iii) Sengeni. The first son-Rathinam had three wives, namely, (1)Amirthammal, (2)Jagadambal and (3)Kannammal. Muthukumarasami - the second son of Mangan had only one son Venugopal and the third son-Sengeni had left the house long back and he could not be traced. So, he is deemed to have been died, as per the presumption under the Inaian Evidence Act. The sons of Jagadambal and Kannammal, namely, Palaniandi and Saravanavelu, respectively, had filed the suit against the grand children of first wife-Amirthammal, born through her first son-Subburayan.

(3.) In the suit, preliminary decree was passed, on 18.3.1993. Subsequently, the plaintiff had filed application in I.A.No.757 of 1998, for passing the final decree. In the final decree proceedings, an Advocate Commissioner was appointed and he also filed his report on 7.8.2008. When the final decree proceedings were pending, one Mr.Nagamuthu, son of the said Venugopal, filed a petition in I.A.No.248 of 2008, to implead him as defendant in the suit. The grand children of the first wife Amirthammal, born through her second son-Thangavelu, filed a petition in I.A.No.249 of 2008, with similar prayer of impleading them as defendants in the suit. The petitioner had filed his counter and contested the petitions. The learned I Additional Sub Judge, Cuddalore, allowed the applications. Aggrieved by the order, the present revisions have been filed.