P. KALIAMMAL Vs. CT. PERIASAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is preferred by the plaintiff in the suit in O.S. No. 34 of 2010, on the file of the District Court, Sivagangai.

(2.) The revision petitioner filed a suit in O.S. No. 34 of 2010 on the file of the District Court, Sivagangai for partition of 1/2 share in all the scheduled mentioned properties and for consequential reliefs. Originally the suit was for four items of properties. During the pendency of the suit, the revision petitioner filed a petition for amendment of plaint. The details of the amendments that was sought by the petitioner is regarding (a) inclusion of the boundary description of the properties; (b) deletion of some of the items in the suit properties and (c) for inclusion of certain properties. Though the amendments that was sought for by the petitioner with regard to deletion of certain properties and for including boundary description of properties, which are already described in the plaint, were allowed, the amendment for the purpose of inclusion of some more properties to the plaint schedule was rejected by the trial Court. Aggrieved over the same, the plaintiff is before this Court with this Civil Revision Petition.

(3.) The trial Court dismissed the application regarding inclusion of some more items in the plaint schedule only on the ground that there is no record to show that the properties that are sought to be included by way of amendment are joint family properties. It is further stated by the trial Court that the revision petitioner has not stated as to how the properties proposed to be included in the plaint schedule were acquired and that without any such particulars in the petition for amendment, the petition filed by the revision petitioner for amendment of plaint could not be accepted.