Madras High Court
CRP/6062/2026 of R.G.Kausalya Vs S.S.Gurusamy Gounder on 30 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 30-09-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
Civil Revision Petition No.6062 of 2026
& CMP.No.26246 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA012202612026}
R.G.Kausalya
D/o S.S.Gurusamy Gounder,
W/o V.C.Sivakumar,
Door No.146, 8th Cross,
Ground Floor,
Behind Ramanshree
California Resort,
DUO Marvel Lay-Out,
Yelahanka New Town,
Bangalore North,
Karnataka 560 064
...Petitioner
Vs
1. S.S.Gurusamy Gounder
S/o Subramania Gounder,
190, Annamaduvu,
Chithireddypalayam,
Pachampalayam Village,
Andhiyur Taluk,
Erode District.
2. G.Balasubramaniam
S/o S.S.Gurusamy Gounder,
Annamaduvu Chithireddypalayam,
Pachampalayam Village,
Andhiyur Taluk, Erode District.
...Respondents
PETITION under Article 227 of The Constitution of India against the fair and final order dated 10.3.2026 passed in I.A.No.7
of 2025 in I.A.No.5 of 2022 in O.S.No.50 of 2019 on the file of the Fourth Additional District Court, Erode District at Bhavani.
For Petitioner:
Mr.L.Mouli
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 10.3.2026 passed in I.A.No.7 of 2025 in I.A No.5 of 2022 in O.S.No.50 of 2019 on the file of the Fourth Additional District Court, Erode District at Bhavani (for short, the Court below) wherein the application filed by the petitioner to implead herself as a party to the final decree proceedings came to be dismissed.
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. The first respondent, who is none other than the father of both the petitioner as well as the second respondent, filed the said suit against the second respondent seeking for the relief of partition and for allotment of half share in the suit properties and also for permanent injunction. In the said suit, a preliminary decree was passed on 28.4.2022. Thereafter, the final decree proceedings were initiated in I.A.No.5 of 2022. In the meantime, the first respondent/ plaintiff executed a settlement/gift deed dated 03.2.2022 in favour of the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner wanted to get herself impleaded in the final decree proceedings by filing the present application since the petitioner will be ultimately entitled for the equitable partition in the place of her father namely the first respondent.
5. The Court below dismissed the present application by the impugned order only on the ground that the settlement deed was executed by the first respondent in favour of the petitioner only during the pendency of the said suit. Aggrieved by that, the above civil revision petition has been filed.
6. In the considered view of this Court, the first respondent/ plaintiff did not have any objection in the petitioner being impleaded as a party to the final decree proceedings since the half share that was sought to be allotted by the first respondent/plaintiff has already been settled in favour of the petitioner. Therefore, it is only the petitioner, who will effectively prosecute the final decree proceedings at the time of equitable allotment of share in the suit properties.
7. Admittedly, the petitioner is not a third party and she is only the daughter of the first respondent/plaintiff. Hence, the Court below ought not to have dismissed the present application, but should have proceeded further after impleading the petitioner and directed appointment of an advocate commissioner to survey the suit properties and submit a report in order to ensure equitable distribution of the suit properties by allotting half share in favour of the petitioner and half share in favour of the second respondent/ defendant.
8. In the light of the above discussions, the above civil revision petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 10.3.2026 passed in I.A.No.7 of 2025 in I.A.No.5 of 2022 in O.S.No.50 of 2019 on the file of the Fourth Additional District Court, Erode District at Bhavani is set aside. I.A.No.7 of 2025 is allowed. There shall be a direction to the Court below to dispose of I.A.No.5 of 2022 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, the connected CMP is closed. 30-09-2026 To The Fourth Additional District Court, Erode District at Bhavani. RS
N.ANAND VENKATESH,J RS CRP.No.6062 of 2026& CMP.No.26246 of 2026 30-09-2026