(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the unsuccessful Petitioners in I.A.No.81 of 2013 in O.S.No.328 of 2012.
(2.) I.A. No.81 of 2013 was filed by the Revision Petitioners herein, who are third parties in the suit in O.S.No.328 of 2012. In the said I.A, the Revision Petitioners prayed that they should be impleaded as defendants in O.S.No.328 of 2012.
(3.) According to the Revision Petitioners, they are the tenants in the third Respondent/Thiruvaduthurai Atheenam and have exclusive rights over the suit schedule property. In specific, the case of the Revision Petitioners is that they are tenants in old Survey No.1759, which is New Survey No.M3/121~ 2, at Nagercoil, Agasteeswaram Taluk, Kanyakumari District. They further state that the suit is filed by the first and second Respondents herein for a permanent injunction to restrain the Defendant in the suit, namely, the third Respondent herein from entering into the property described in the suit schedule (which is in Survey No. 1759) or putting up construction or in any other manner disturbing the possession of the second and third Respondents herein/Plaintiffs therein and also to demolish the 300 square foot concrete structure located to the west of the Plaintiffs- house in the suit schedule property. According to the Revision Petitioners, in view of the fact that they are the tenants of the third Respondent Atheenam and are in possession of property in the same survey number as that specified in the suit schedule, they are necessary or proper parties to the suit. Consequently, it is their contention that the interlocutory application filed by them under Order 1 Rule 10 Civil Procedure Code should not have been rejected and that there are material irregularities in the impugned order.