CRP/1959/2023 of C.V.MANIGANDAN Vs C.V.Siva Subramanian on 6 October 2026

Common Order

These Civil Revision Petitions have been filed against the fair and decretal orders passed in IA No.4 of 2022 and IA No.8 of 2024 in OS No. No.175 of 2019 on the file of the learned VIII Assistant Judge , City Civil

Court, Chennai.

2. The petitioner in CRP PD No.1959 of 2023 is the plaintiff, who filed the suit seeking for the relief of permanent injunction restraining defendants 1 and 2 from selling the plaintiff’s share in the suit property, a permanent injunction restraining defendants 1 to 3 from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff’s share in the suit property and a permanent injunction restraining the 4th defendant from registering the Sale deeds submitted by the defendants 1 and 2 on 22.11.2018, which were kept as pending document under document Nos.112 and 113 of 2018.

3. During the pendency of this suit, the plaintiff filed IA No.4 of 2022 under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC seeking to amend the plaint by including the relief of declaration that the two Sale deeds registered as Document Nos.1634 and 1635 of 2019 as null and void and not binding on the plaintiff along with the necessary averments insofar as these reliefs are concerned. The Court below by an order dated 31.03.2023 dismissed the application. Aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff has filed CRP (PD) No.1959 of 2023.

4. The suit was dismissed for default on 17.07.2023. Hence, the plaintiff filed an application in IA No.8 of 2024 under Order IX Rule 9 of CPC seeking restoration of the suit. The said application was allowed by the Court below by order dated 24.10.2025. Aggrieved by the same, the 3rd defendant in the suit has filed CRP No.6199 of 2025.

5. Heard both sides and carefully perused the materials available on record as well the orders passed by the Court below.

6. The plaintiff has sought to amend the plaint by adding the necessary reliefs and consequential averments on the ground that the two sale deeds, which had initially been kept as pending documents, were subsequently registered and assigned document Nos.1634 and 1635 of 2019 on 15.03.2019. Therefore, the same necessitated the plaintiffs to seek for the necessary reliefs and to include the necessary averments in the plaint.

7. The respondents /defendants are opposing the claim on the ground that the plaintiff does not have any right to question the sale of the property in favour of the 3rd defendant, since there was already a compromise between the parties on an earlier occasion, pursuant to which the properties were partitioned and the plaintiff had already claimed for pre-emptive right which was also adjudicated upon by a competent Civil Court and that the present suit has been filed only with a view to harass the defendants.

8. In the considered view of this Court, this Court can only deal with the scope of the order passed by the Court below in the applications filed for amendment of plaint. By virtue of the amendment, the petitioner has included the reliefs by questioning the validity of the two sale deeds and has also included the necessary averments to strengthen those reliefs. The reliefs sought for does not in any way change the character of the suit, since the documents are kept as pending documents at the time of filing of the suit and subsequently it came to be registered. Therefore, the amendment was only a formal amendment that had to be carried out to enable the plaintiff to work out the remedy.

9. The issue regarding the maintainability of the suit and the reliefs sought for is not a subject matter in the present Civil Revision petition. If according to the defendants, the suit itself is not maintainable and the plaint is liable to be rejected, it is for them to file an appropriate application before the concerned Court and seek for the necessary reliefs.

10. The order passed by the Court below in IA No.4 of 2022 dated 31.03.2023 is liable to be interfered by this Court and accordingly, the same is set-aside.

11. Insofar as CRP No.6199 of 2025 is concerned, the order passed by the Court below allowing the application filed under Order IX Rule 9 of CPC to restore the suit, which was dismissed for default on 17.07.2023 has been put to challenge. The Court below has taken into consideration the fact that the CRP No.1959 of 2023 was pending before this Court and the plaintiff was not in a position to proceed further with the case without the necessary amendment. Therefore, the Court below in order to afford an opportunity to the plaintiff has restored the suit.

12. The above order passed by the Court below does not suffer from any perversity warranting the interference of this Court.

13. In the light of the above discussion, CRP No.1959 of 2023 is allowed and CRP No.6199 of 2023 stands dismissed. There shall be a direction to the Court below to dispose of the suit in OS No.175 of 2019 within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and a compliance report shall be filed before this Court. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 06-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No RKA To The VIII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.

N.ANAND VENKATESH J. RKA

CRP Nos. 1959 of 2023 and 6199 of 2025

AND CMP NO. 12371 OF 2023 06-10-2026