Madras High Court
CRP/6739/2026 of G. Saravanan Vs Jayalakshmi on 26 October 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 26-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
Civil Revision Petition No.6739 of 2026
& CMP.No.29018 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA012483732026}
G.Saravanan
S/o Gopal,
Kanakupillai Vattam,
Chikananguppam Village,
Vaniyampadi Taluk,
Tirupattur District
...Petitioner
Vs
1. Jayalakshmi
W/o Samikannu,
Kamarajar Nagar,
Nekkundhi Village,
Vaniyampadi Taluk,
Tirupattur District
2. Radhammal
W/o Karunakaran,
No.368, 7th Cross,
Indira Nagar, Rajathi Nagar,
Bengaluru, Karnataka State
3. Rukkumani
( Uploaded on: 27/10/2026 02:36:21 pm )
W/o Gopal
Sangathu Vattam,
Madhanancheri Village,
Vaniyampadi Taluk,
Tirupattur District
4. Banumathi
W/o Mohan,
Pillaiyar Koil Street,
Bhavani Nagar,
Thiruninravur, Chennai
5. Maniammal
W/o Late Masilamani
Chikkanankuppam Post & Village,
Vaniyampadi Taluk,
Tirupattur District
6. Rajagopal
S/o Late Masilamani
Chikkanankuppam Post & Village,
Vaniyampadi Taluk,
Tirupattur District
7. Kumaresan
S/o Late Masilamani
No.11, 5th Street,
Vinoba Nagar, Tondiarpet,
Chennai 600 081
8. Mathankumar
S/o Kumaresan
No.11, 5th Street,
Vinoba Nagar, Tondiarpet,
Chennai 600 081
9. Seenivasan
S/o Kumaresan
No.11, 5th Street,
( Uploaded on: 27/10/2026 02:36:21 pm )
Vinoba Nagar, Tondiarpet,
Chennai 600 081
10. Mahalakshmi
D/o Kumaresan
No.11, 5th Street,
Vinoba Nagar, Tondiarpet,
Chennai 600 081
11. Venugopal
S/o Kumaresan
No.11, 5th Street,
Vinoba Nagar,
Tondiarpet, Chennai 600 081
12. Senthamilselvi
D/o Venugopal
No.11, 5th Street,
Vinoba Nagar, Tondiarpet,
Chennai 600 081
13. Sakthivel
S/o Venugopal
No.11, 5th Street,
Vinoba Nagar, Tondiarpet,
Chennai 600 081
14. Shalini
D/o Venugopal
No.11, 5th Street,
Vinoba Nagar, Tondiarpet,
Chennai 600 081
15. Balu, S/o Late Masilamani
Keezh Vattam,
Chikkanankuppam Post & Village,
Vaniyampadi Taluk,
Tirupattur District
( Uploaded on: 27/10/2026 02:36:21 pm )
16. Chandrasekar
S/o Chinnadurai,
Mel Alinjikulam Village,
Devasthanam Post,
Vaniyampadi Taluk,
Tirupattur District.
...Respondents
PETITION under Article 227 of The Constitution of India against the fair and decretal order dated 22.7.2026 made in I.A.No.
1 of 2026 in O.S.No.40 of 2021 on the file of the District Court, Tirupattur.
For Petitioner:
Mr.S.N.Ravichandran
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
This civil revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of The Constitution of India against the order dated 22.7.2026 made in I.A.No.1 of 2026 in O.S.No.40 of 2021 on the file of the District Court, Tirupattur (for short, the Court below) wherein the application filed by respondents 1 to 4/plaintiffs under Order I Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) seeking to implead the petitioner as the proposed D13 in the said suit, came to be allowed.
( Uploaded on: 27/10/2026 02:36:21 pm )
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. This Court has carefully considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record and more particularly the impugned order.
4. Respondents 1 to 4/plaintiffs filed the said suit seeking for the relief of partition and for other consequential reliefs. During the pendency of the said suit, respondents 1 to 4/plaintiffs filed the said application seeking to implead the petitioner as D13 in the said suit on the ground that pending the said suit, D12 executed a sale deed dated 03.12.2025 in favour of the petitioner/D13 and that therefore, he would be a necessary party to the proceedings.
5. The grievance of the petitioner is that even though the petitioner had entered appearance through a counsel, no opportunity was given to him to contest the said application and that the Court below straight away allowed the said application without assigning any reasons and by recording as if the petitioner did not contest the case and was set ex parte.
( Uploaded on: 27/10/2026 02:36:21 pm )
6. In the considered view of this Court, even if the petitioner is permitted to contest the said application, the fact remains that the petitioner purchased the property, which is the subject matter of the suit by a sale deed dated 03.12.2025 during the pendency of the said suit. If, ultimately, the said suit is decreed and the matter progresses towards final decree proceedings, equitable distribution of the property must be made. At that point of time, the presence of the petitioner will be essential since the petitioner purchased suit property.
7. Therefore, even if the petitioner wants to contest the said application, nothing substantial is going to come out of such an opportunity and the result is going to be the same. In view of the above, even if the petitioner is allowed to contest the said application, nothing substantial is going to come out in terms of the result of the said application and this Court does not want such useless formality to be adopted by the Court below. On that ground, the impugned order is sustained. It is always open to the petitioner to file a written statement, take a necessary stand and contest the said suit.
( Uploaded on: 27/10/2026 02:36:21 pm )
8. The civil revision petition is disposed of in the above terms. Consequently, the connected CMP is closed.
26-10-2026 To The District Court, Tirupattur RS
( Uploaded on: 27/10/2026 02:36:21 pm )
N.ANAND VENKATESH,J RS CRP.No.6739 of 2026& CMP.No.29018 of 2026 26-10-2026
( Uploaded on: 27/10/2026 02:36:21 pm )