MADHAIYAN Vs. K.TIRUPATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is filed by the defendants, who were partly successful in seeking amemdment of the plaint.

(2.) The defendants sought for three amendments. Insofar as two out of three amendments, the revision petitioners did not even oppose the same. However, the third amendment was strongly opposed by the revision petitioners on the ground that the amemdment that is sought for in the schedule of the property is without any pleading and that when the plaintiffs claim title under the registered Settlement Deed, even the said registered Settlement Deed did not include the borewell, which is now sought to be included in the schedule alone. The Trial Court, despite strong opposition to the said amendment, proceeded to allow the same and aggrieved by the same, the defendants as revision petitioners, have challenged the said order.

(3.) I have heard Mr.R.Subramanian, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.S.Arjun, learned counsel for the respondents.