RAJALAKSHMI Vs. M. BALASUBRAMANIUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Original Side Appeal has been filed as against the Order passed by the learned Judge in Application No.4664 of 2021 in C.S. No.362 of 2021, on 30/9/2022.

(2.) The facts which are necessary for disposal of this Original Side Appeal are as follows:

(3.) The learned Counsel for the Appellants has submitted that the Respondents 1 to 3 have claimed similar reliefs in C.S. No.362 of 2021 and in O.S. No.7775 of 2019 and it is barred under law inasmuch as it attracts mischief under Order 2, Rule 2 of CPC. The Respondents 1 to 3 ought to have filed a comprehensive Suit uniting all the causes of action. The Suit for Movable Property falls under Sec. 24 of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act and as such, invocation of Sec. 37(1) of the Act is erroneous. They have filed the Suit treating the deposits as Movable Assets held by co-sharers and sought for Partition instead of filing a Suit for Recovery of money and paying Court-fee under Sec. 24 of the Act. The learned Counsel further submitted that the learned Judge ought to have noticed that the deposits have been appropriating benefits and lost the character of oneness/joint holding of all shares and hence, the proper remedy available for them is receiver of money and not anything else. In support of his contentions, the learned Counsel placed reliance on the following decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court: