AMMU AMMAL Vs. K R ANDU GOWDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioners are the petitioners 4 to 8 in I. A. No. 63 of 2003 and proposed respondents 4 to 8 in A. S. No. 29 of 2000 on the file of the District Court, Nilgiris. The petition I. A. No. 63 of 2003 was filed claiming that they are the legal representatives of K. R. Raju, the deceased sole respondent in the appeal A. S. No. 29 of 2000. The revision is directed against the dismissal of I. A. No. 63 of 2003 as per order dated 26. 2. 2003, which was filed under Order I Rule 10 (2) C. P. C. to implead the revision petitioners as respondents 4 to 8 in the appeal A. S. No. 29 of 2003.

(2.) THE first respondent as plaintiff filed the suit O. S. No. 155 of 1996 on the file of the Sub Court, Udhagamandalam against his brother K. R. Raju, Ex. M. L. A. for partition of his half share in the suit property in Kotagiri village, Nilgiris District and the suit after contest was dismissed and the first respondent herein filed the appeal A. S. No. 29 of 2000 before the District Court, Nilrigis. During the pendency of the appeal, since the sole respondent K. R. Raju died, the revision petitioners herein along with respondents 2 and 3, their mother and sister filed I. A. No. 63 of 2003 under Order I Rule 10 (2) C. P. C. to implead them as parties in the appeal claiming that they are step mother, step brothers and step sisters, that the sole respondent K. R. Raju in the appeal died intestate on 24. 3. 2002 at Ketti village leaving unregistered Will dated 12. 2. 2002, bequeathing all his movable and immovable properties to them and that they are necessary parties to the appeal.

(3.) THE petition I. A. No. 63 of 2003 was resisted in the counter that the petition already filed under Order 22, Rule 4 and Section 151 C. P. C. by the said petitioners was not proceeded further and the present petition is hit by the Doctrine of lis pendens. The petition was also resisted that having failed in their attempt to declare them as legal representatives of the deceased K. R. Raju before Revenue Authorities, the petition I. A. No. 63 of 2003 was filed. The alleged Will is a fabricated and forged one and the petitioners cannot derive any interest through that Will. The petitioners are not necessary parties.