A K K BASKARAN Vs. JEYAKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.149 of 2010 on the file of the learned Additional District Munsif, Srivilliputtur and he filed the suit for declaration with the consequential relief of injunction, restraining the defendants from interfering with the peaceful possession of the plaintiff's suit property. Pending the said suit, an application was filed by one Jeyakumar, seeking to implead him as the 3rd defendant in the suit and the application was allowed by the Trial Court with an observation that the question as to whether the proposed defendant is the legalheir of Muthammal and Muthu Irulan or not will be decided at the time of judgment in the suit. Aggrieved by the order of such impleadment, the revision petitioner/plaintiff is before this Court.

(2.) It is the case of the revision petitioner / plaintiff that after the death of the original owner, Muthu Petchi, the suit schedule property devolved upon her only son Gurusamy and two daughters, namely, Muthammal, W/o.Muthu Irulan and Karuppayee, W/o.Chelliah. Subsequently, Muthammal died before 22 years leaving behind her son Karuppiah / 2nd defendant as the sole legal heir and thus, Gurusamy, Karuppayee and Karuppiah have become the absolute owner of the property, from whom, the plaintiff is stated to have purchased the suit schedule property for a sale consideration of Rs.4,000/- by way of a sale deed dated 10.11.1990.

(3.) It is the further case of the revision petitioner / plaintiff that pursuant to the denial of execution of sale deed dated 10.11.1990 by the defendants and their attempt to usurp the property by illegal means, the plaintiff had filed the suit for declaration and permanent injunction. To add fuel to the fire, now, the proposed respondent, claiming himself to be the brother of the 2nd defendant sought to implead him in the suit.