VENKATACHALAM Vs. PAZHANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE civil revision petitions are filed against the order dated 7.8.2008 passed in I.A.No,2746 of 2007 in O.S.No,51 of 1997 passed by the I Additional District Munsif, Vridhachalam. Inveighing the order dated dated 7.8.2008 passed in I.A.No,2746 of 2007 in O.S.No,51 of 1997 by the I Additional District Munsif, Vridhachalam, this civil revision petition is focussed.

(2.) A summation and summarisation of facts, which are absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this revision petition, would run thus:- The respondent, as plaintiff, filed the suit for declaration and injunction with regard to the suit immovable property making the following prayer:-

(3.) I would like to point out that the mistake was committed by the office as well as the lower Court Judge in entertaining the said application. On seeing that the application for amendment is bereft of the proposed amendments, the lower Court should have returned the application itself for compliance or the lower Court Judge, after erroneously taking the I.A on file and after coming to know the apparent error in the petition, should have directed the party to take steps to furnish the relevant proposed amendments but surprisingly the lower Court had not done so. It had simply dismissed the I.A.