Ramanathan v. C. Dhakshinamurthy

ORDER This Civil Revision Petition has been filed seeking to set aside the order passed in IA No.15 of 2025 in OS No.25 of 2018 on the file of III Additional District Judge Erode at Gopichettipalayam.

¶2The first respondent/plaintiff filed I.A No. 15 of 2025 in OS No. 25 of 2016 under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC seeking to amend the plaint stating that he filed the suit seeking 1/9th share in the suit property along with other consequential relief. While so, 4th defendant died on 16.06.2025, therefore on the death of 4th defendant his share devolves upon the plaintiff and 3rd defendant are his only legal heirs. Accordingly, the plaintiff/first respondent's entitlement is increased to 1/6th share in the suit property and the plaint requires to be amended to that effect. On the other hand, the 2nd and 3rd respondent/1st and 2nd defendants filed counter raised objection to allow the application.

¶3On hearing both sides, the Trial Court held that plaintiff wants amend the pleadings on death of his father/4th defendant. Though the plaintiff claimed 1/9th share while filing the suit, after the death of his father/4th defendant the plaintiff claiming 1/6th share in the suit property to that effect he filed the plaint. Mere amending the plaint would not give absolute entitlement to the plaintiff and the first defendant is having right to file additional written statement after amending the plaint. Accordingly allowed the application. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner/first defendant filed this petition.

¶4Heard the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶5Admittedly, as rightly pointed by the Trial Court, if at all any grievance with regard to entitlement of share the aggrieved parties are entitled to file additional written statement. Further, only after full fledged trial the Trial Court will decide the entitlement of the plaintiff's share in suit property, mere amending the plaint would not means the plaintiff is entitled to share as amended in the plaint. Hence, the findings rendered by the Trial Court is justifiable one which needs no interference. However, the suit is of the year 2018, the Trial Court is directed to dispose of the suit within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶6In the result, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No Costs. Pending petition, if any, is/are closed. 17-03-2026 pbl Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To

¶1The III Additional District Judge Erode at Gopichettipalayam.

¶2The Section Officer, V. R Section, High Court, Madras. CRPeNo.e1562eofe2026 T.V.THAMILSELVIoJ. ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooopbl CRPoNo.o1562oofo2026 ANDoCMPoNO.o7363oOFo 2026 17-03-2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17-03-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI AND CMP NO. 7363 OF 2026 1. Ramanathan S/o. Periyasamy, D.No.4, Periyanan St, Modachur Village, Gopichettipalayam Taluk, Erode Dt. Petitioner(s) Vs 1. C. Dhakshinamurthy S/o. K. Chandran, D.No.728, G.D. Road, Kolappalur, Gopichettipalayam Taluk, Erode Dt. 2.P. Loganathan S/o. Periyasamy, D.No.4, Periyanan St, Modachur Village, Gopichettipalayam Taluk, Erode Dt. 3.Deivanai Ashok W/o. Ashik Kehnariyas, BW-101, Kalyanaraman St, Dharga Road, Zameen Pallavaram, Chennai. 4.K. Chandran (died) 4. Manager Tamil Nadu Mercantile Bank, Gopichettipalayam Taluk, Erode Dt. Respondent(s) PRAYER To set aside this Civil Revision Petition and dated 30.01.2026 made in IA No.15 of 2025 in OS No.25 of 2018 on the file of III Additional District Judge Erode at Gopichettipalayam. For Petitioner(s): MR.B.Manoharan For Respondent(s):