SARASWATHI AMMAL Vs. UNNAMALAI ANIMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has made as endorsement on the case bundle as follows: "the C. R. P. Nos. 2138 and 2139 of 1996 are withdrawn with liberty to file fresh suit. " The learned senior counsel even on the prior hearing has been apprised that this Court cannot give any liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh suit, and it is for the petitioner to either pursue the revisions by making submissions on the merits of the revisions themselves or withdraw the revisions if she so desires. As a matter of fact submissions were also made on merits initially, though at a later stage, adjournment was taken. But in spite of the same, endorsement has been made by the counsel on record as above on his own volition.

(2.) C. R. P. No. 2138 of 1996 has been filed against the order dated 13. 10. 1995 dismissing the unnumbered I. A. filed on 31. 7. 1995 for seeking the relief of substituting the fourth defendant as the plaintiff to enable him to pursue and prosecute the suit further. C. R. P. No. 2139 of 1996 has been filed against the order dated 13. 10. 1995 rejecting the unnumbered application filed under O. 1, Rule 10 and O. 23 seeking for impleading the fourth respondent/ petitioner as the legal representative of the plaintiff to pursue and prosecute the suit further. Both the above applications have been rejected on the ground that they have been filed beyond the period of limitation prescribed therefor, the plaintiff having died on 30. 4. 1995 itself.