CRP/5385/2026 of G.Sudenderadoss Vs P.Rajendiran alias Rajan on 7 October 2026

ORDER

This civil revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 30.01.2026 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2025 in O.S.No.194 of 2021 by the III Additional District Judge, Puducherry, wherein the application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff under Order VI Rule 17 CPC for carrying out amendments in the plaint, came to be rejected by the Court below.

2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for respondent and carefully perused the materials available on record. This Court also went through the impugned order.

3. The petitioner is the plaintiff, who filed the suit in O.S.No.194 of 2021 seeking for the relief of partition and for allotment of 2/3rd share in the suit property and for mandatory injunction to remove the obstructions in the common passage. I.A.No.1 of 2025 in O.S.No.194 of 2021 was filed under Order VI Rule 17 CPC for amendment of plaint on the ground that during the pendency of the suit, the respondent/defendant had constructed a wall in the pathway that leads to the suit property and therefore, the petitioner/plaintiff wanted the relief of mandatory injunction to remove this wall in order to access the suit property. Necessary averments were also included in the plaint in this regard. The Court below dismissed the application only on the ground that the construction of the wall was not in the suit property and it is a separate cause of action, which has to be agitated independently by the petitioner/plaintiff against the respondent/defendant. Aggrieved by the said order, the present revision has been filed before this Court.

4. In the considered view of this Court, the petitioner/plaintiff had already sought for the relief of mandatory injunction when the suit was originally filed. During the pendency of the suit, a wall is said to have been put up in the pathway leading to the suit property and the petitioner/plaintiff is seeking for removal of the wall. By including this relief along with the averments, no prejudice will be caused to the respondent/defendant and by driving the petitioner/plaintiff to file an injunction suit, it will only lead to multiplicity of proceedings. Ultimately, the suit property can be enjoyed only through the common pathway and if that pathway is obstructed, the suit property cannot be enjoyed. The Court below has taken a very hyper-technical view in this case and has dismissed the application. In the light of the above discussion, the order dated 30.01.2026 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2025 in O.S.No.194 of 2021 by the III Additional District Judge, Puducherry, is set aside and this civil revision petition is allowed. It goes without saying that the order passed in the present revision will not have any bearing when the Court below decides the suit on merits after considering the rival claims. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 07-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No gm To The III Additional District Judge, Puducherry.

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J. gm Civil Revision Petition No.5385 of 2026 07-10-2026