KRISHNASAMY Vs. A VALLIAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner claims that he is the absolute owner of an extent of 16 cents of land comprised in R.S No.728/11 D of Eraniel Village and the residential building bearing Door.No.21-49/25A 1 of Nullivilai Panchayat. His apprehension is that he may be dispossessed at the instance of the parties in O.S No.238 of 2011 on the file of the Sub Court, Padmanabhapuram in which a preliminary decree had already been passed on 04.09.2012. The revision petitioner filed I.A SR No.524 of 2018 to get himself impleaded in the final decree proceedings in I.A No.172 of 2013. The said I.A was dismissed on 30.01.2018. Questioning the same, CRP(MD)No.1575 of 2018 has been filed.

(2.) When the matter was taken up for disposal, it was submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondents that final decree has since been passed in the said partition suit. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner however contended that the passing of the final decree though on the same day was subsequent to the rejection of I.A SR No.524 of 2018 filed by him. In the event of allowing of the CRP, the final decree proceedings will have to be necessarily re-opened and the mere passing of a final decree will not render the CRP infructuous.

(3.) No doubt, the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner is right in his contention. But, he is right only in a technical sense. The partition suit was filed on 29.09.2011. The property of the revision petitioner had earlier stood in the name of his mother Rukmoni. The said Rukmoni had settled the property in question in favour of the revision petitioner on 10.08.2010. It is true that the revision petitioner was not made a party to the suit proceedings. But then, the revision petitioner's mother was shown as the third defendant. Preliminary decree was passed as early as 04.09.2012. Application for passing final decree was filed in the year 2013 itself in I.A No.172 of 201 An Advocate Commissioner was appointed. Only on 25.01.2018, I.A SR No.524 of 2018 came to be filed. It was rejected on 30.01.2018 within five days thereafter. But, on the same day final decree was also passed. It is not the case of the revision petitioner that his mother acted adverse to his interest.