RANGASAMY Vs. K C PALANISAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision Petition has been preferred against the order, dated 27.11.2006 passed in C.M.A.No.2 of 2006 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Gobichettipalayam, reversing the order, dated 16.11.2005 passed in I.A.No.502 of 2004 in O.S.No.289 of 2004 on the file of the District Munsif, Sathyamangalam.

(2.) IT is an admitted fact that the revision petitioner, as plaintiff filed the suit against the respondent herein and three others before the Sub-Court, Gobichettipalayam, seeking a partition decree, that was decreed exparte. Subsequently, the respondent / fourth defendant had filed an Interlocutory Application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC to set aside the exparte decree passed on 26.08.1992. The learned District Munsif, considering the facts and circumstances, dismissed the Interlocutory Application. Aggrieved by which, the respondent herein preferred the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal referred above before the Principal Sub-Court, Gobichettipalayam. The appellate court reversed the order and decreetal order passed by the trial court and set aside the exparte decree, dated 26.08.1992. Aggrieved by which, the plaintiff in the suit has preferred this revision.

(3.) AS contended by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent, there are triable issues and the genuineness and the validity of the alleged Will has to be established, as per procedure known to law. In such circumstances, as it is a partition suit, to meet the ends of justice, I find it reasonable to direct the court below to dispose the main suit only on merits and in accordance with law.