VELAYUTHAM Vs. VENUGOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision is preferred by the proposed 17th Defendant in the suit who was impleaded as Legal Representative of the deceased 10 th Defendant by name Somasundaram and who died on 10. 10. 1993.

(2.) THE first Respondent/plaintiff has filed O. P. No. 17 of 1989 on the file of the Sub-Court, Cuddalore, seeking to declare him as an informa pauper, declaration of his title to nine items of suit properties situated in koothapakkam Village, Cuddalore Taluk and for recovery of possession on the ground that the District Revenue Officials arrayed as first and second defendants were influenced by the Defendants 3 to 6, engulfing his property unlawfully under the guise of patta proceedings and also in collusion with defendants 7 and 9. In the Original Petition, it was further alleged that the deceased 10th Defendant Somasundaram had also purchased one specific portion of the suit property as per a sale deed dated 26. 6. 1980. Among 9 items, subject matter of suit, the allegation against the deceased 10th Defendant whose Legal Representative was arrayed as Revision Petitioner, is that one specific portion of the subject matter of the suit was acquired by 10 th defendant under the guise of a sale deed dated 26. 6. 1980. Unfortunately, the original Petition has not been drafted in such a way to include a prayer to set aside the said sale. However, delivery of possession was required in respect of all suit items. Since that Original Petition regarding indigent issue was dismissed on 18. 9. 1992, the first Respondent/plaintiff preferred appeal before this Court in C. M. A. No. 1313 of 1993.

(3.) A poor man who could not pay Court Fees although he filed the original Petition before the Sub-Court, Cuddalore in the year 1989, was able to succeed in treating him as informa pauper, only on 16. 3. 2001, by virtue of the order of this Court in C. M. A. No. 1313 of 1993. It is thereafter, the O. P. , was converted into suit in O. S. No. 264 of 200 1 on the file of Sub-Court, cuddalore, where the first Respondent/ the sole plaintiff filed an application in February, 2002 in I. A. No. 142 of 2002, to implead this Revision Petitioner as Legal Representative of the deceased 10th Defendant Somasundaram, on the ground that he had knowledge of death of the 10th Defendant only on 4. 12. 2001. True, it is that there was no petition to set aside the abatement filed by the plaintiff in the trial Court. But considering the fact that similar application in I. A. No. 543 of 2002 was allowed on 4. 6. 2003 in getting impleaded the Defendants 18 to 21 as Legal Representatives of the deceased 6th Defendant and also by considering the fact that the said application to implead the legal Representative of 10th Defendant was within 90 days from the date of knowledge of death, the Trial Court had entertained that application and allowed the same, which is the order agitated here.