VIRUTHAMBAL AND OTHER Vs. MOHAMMED SALIA AND OTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Civil Revision Petition is filed to direct the learned Subordinate Judge, Tiruvannamalai, to take O.S.SR. No. 4843 of 2013 on record and number the same as being maintainable before the Subordinate Court, Tiruvannamalai.

(2.) The petitioner filed plaint in O.S.SR. No. 4843 of 2013 for declaration that the first petitioner has absolute title, interest and right over the suit properties and for consequential permanent injunction restraining the respondents from interfering with the petitioners' possession and enjoyment and for declaration that the entire proceedings in O.S. No. 16 of 2009 on the file of the District Court, Tiruvannamalai, are fraudulent and null and void and not binding on the petitioners.

(3.) According to the petitioners, the respondents played fraud on the Court and obtained decree dated 29.04.2009 in O.S. No. 16 of 2009. In view of the decree being obtained by playing fraud and the said decree is nullity, it is liable to be set aside and it is not binding on the petitioners. The learned Judge returned the plaint raising a query with regard to maintainability of the suit before the District Munsif Court, when the decree in O.S. No. 16 of 2009 was passed by the District Court, Tiruvannamalai. The petitioners represented the plaint quoting the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in AIR 1994 SC 853 (S.P.Chengalvaraya Naidu (dead) by legal heirs, v. Jagannath (dead) by legal heirs and others) and submitted that a decree of Superior Court can be challenged in the Inferior Court. The learned Judge returned the plaint on various defects including the query as to how the suit is maintainable. Finally, the plaint was returned on 30.10.2013 raising the question of maintainability.