A.V.MURUGAN Vs. K.MAHESWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the order passed by the Court below dismissing the application filed by the petitioner under Order I Rule X(2) of C.P.C., to implead the proposed defendants.

(2.) The petitioner is the defendant before the Court below. The first respondent filed a suit claiming for the relief of partition and to allot half share in her favour. The case of the plaintiff is that the suit property was purchased by the plaintiff and the defendant (petitioner herein) jointly, vide registered sale deed, dated 26.09.2001, and that the plaintiff is entitled for half share in the suit property and the defendant is not willing to enjoy the property jointly with the plaintiff.

(3.) The defendant (petitioner) took a specific plea that the plaintiff along with her husband and other close relatives and some others had entered into an understanding for the purchase of properties from one Fathima Tanning Company and plot out the properties and sell it to third parties. The total extent of the property was 15 acres and 69 cents. As per the agreement, the advance amount was paid to Fathima Tanning Company and the balance amount was agreed to be paid from time to time, as and when the plotted properties are sold. Pursuant to the agreement, various extents of properties were sold and the money was paid to Fathima Tanning Company. It was further contended that the property was held not only for the benefit of the plaintiff and the defendant but also on behalf of the other persons, who are involved in the joint venture. The defendant has specifically stated that he is entitled for 77.273% in the property, one S.R. Masilamani is entitled for 9.901% and the plaintiff and her husband are entitled for 13.636% in the suit property. Therefore, according to the defendant, the husband of the plaintiff, S.R. Masilamani, Dr. Rathinam and R. Jeeva are necessary parties in the suit.