K P SENTHILVEL Vs. SUBBATHAL AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the fair and final order in I.A.No.1316 of 2014 in I.A.No.774 of 2013 in O.S.No.24 of 2006 on the file of District Munsif Court, Kangeyam, the third party petitioner has filed the above Civil Revision Petition.

(2.) The plaintiffs filed a suit in O.S.No.24 of 2006 for partition. The Trial Court passed a preliminary decree, allotting 1/6th share each to the plaintiffs. Out of six shares, 4/6th was allotted to the plaintiffs and 1/6th was allotted to the second defendant. Though the preliminary decree is silent about the balance of 1/6th share, it is implied that it should go to the first defendant in the suit viz., Muthusami Gounder. The petitioner herein purchased a portion of the property from the said Muthusami Gounder. Similarly, the 7th respondent herein also purchased a portion of the property from the said Muthusami Gounder.

(3.) In the final decree application in I.A.No.774 of 2013, the 7th respondent herein was impleaded as 8th respondent. Though the application filed by the 7th respondent, to get himself impleaded in the final decree application, was allowed by the trial Court, however, the trial court took a different stand and dismissed the application, filed by the revision petitioner to get himself impleaded in the final decree proceedings. Both the revision petitioner and the 7th respondent herein purchased the properties from the very same vendor viz., the Muthusami Gounder, who had died during the pendency of the application.