RADHA Vs. R SUBRAMANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Civil Revision Petition is filed against the fair and decreetal order dated 26.07.2013 made in I.A.No.3468 of 2013 in O.S.No.8178 of 2011 on the file of the XIV Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.

(2.) The facts of the case are as follows:

(3.) Learned counsel for the revision petitioners submitted that it is true, the suit property is originally owned by Church of South India, which was under the possession and enjoyment by one Backiammal, wife of Subramanian. She died issue less and her husband predeceased her. Her only sister is Meenammal and she was residing in the property along with her children and since she died, her legal heirs are entitled to the suit property. One of the sons of Meenammal is Narayanan and his wife is Kuppammal and since she attempted to alienate the suit property, other heirs of Meenammal filed a suit for injunction in O.S.No.1587 of 1998. Whereas the said Kuppammal sold the property to the first respondent herein namely, R.Subramani. Thereafter, she died and during pendency of the suit, Kuppammal's brother namely, Kuppusamy was impleaded as party to the suit and an exparte decree was passed in the suit. So the suit in O.S.No.1587 of 1998 is filed only for injunction to restrain the defendants from alienating the property, but whereas the present suit in O.S.No.8178 of 2011 is filed for partition and separate possession and also declaration that the sale deed executed by Kuppammal is null and void. Hence, it is comprehensive suit. So there is no need to stay the proceedings till the disposal of the second appeal. It is further submitted that there was a family arrangement taken place on 10.07.1986 and that has been mentioned in the present suit. But the trial Court has not considered all the above aspects and wrongly granted stay till the disposal of the second appeal. Therefore, he prayed for allowing the revision petition.