K. CHELLA THANGAM Vs. JESINTHA MARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are the third parties to the suit in O.S.No.369 of 2006, which is a suit for bare injunction filed by the first respondent against the second respondent before the Principal District Munsif Court, Padmanabhapuram. These petitioners have filed an application under Order 1, Rule 10 (2), CPC for impleading of parties by stating that they have already got some rights over the property. In the affidavit, they have stated that by means of document Nos.412/1954, 1663/1968, 533/1986 and 5506/1960 of Sub -Registrar Office, Colachel, they are enjoying the suit properties as absolute owners and the defendant in the suit has no right over the properties and hence, they have to be impleaded as defendants 2 to 6 in this suit. Their impleadment would also avoid the multiplicity of proceedings. They are necessary parties to the suit.

(2.) IN the counter filed by the plaintiff, the allegations in the affidavit are denied. It is further stated that the plaintiff had averred in the plaint that since the defendants attempted to disturb her possession, she filed the suit for permanent injunction and there is no cause of action against these petitioners.

(3.) THE learned Principal District Munsif, Padmanabhapuram has dismissed the application by stating that the petition is a belated one and filed after the suit was posted in the special list for trial and there is no necessity to implead them as the parties to the suit.