P.K. Narayanan Raja vs Ambika And Anr.

P.K. Narayanan Raja ….Appellant(s)

VERSUS

Ambika And Anr. …Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.

1) This appeal is directed against the final

judgment and order dated 23.12.2004 passed by the

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) in Second

Appeal No.19 of 1995 whereby the High Court

allowed the second appeal and set aside the order of

the lower Appellate Court.

2) It is not necessary to set out the entire facts of Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by ANITA MALHOTRA the case in detail except to the extent necessary for Date: 2018.08.10 17:14:08 IST Reason:

the disposal of the appeal.

1

3) The appellant is the plaintiff and the

respondents are the defendants. The appellant and

the respondents are members of one family and are

thus related to one another.

4) The suit out of which this appeal arises was for

a declaration and permanent injunction in relation to

certain immovable properties as specified in the

plaint, which are alleged to belong to members of the

family. The respondents contested the suit.

5) By judgment/decree dated 29.04.1991 in O.S.

No.236 of 1989, the Trial Court dismissed the

appellant's suit. The appellant felt aggrieved and filed

first appeal before the District Judge. By

judgment/decree dated 07.03.1994, the first

Appellate Court allowed the plaintiff's appeal and

decreed the suit. The defendants felt aggrieved and

filed second appeal before the High Court. By

impugned order, the High Court allowed the appeal

and dismissed the suit giving rise to filing of the

2 appeal by way of special leave before this Court by

the plaintiff.

6) At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the

parties stated and brought to our notice that one civil

suit being OS No.46/1986 is pending between the

appellant and the respondents in the Court of

Subordinate Judge of Srivilliputur (TN). This suit

i.e., O.S.No.46/1986 is for partition of several

properties belonging to the members of the family,

who are also parties to the present appeal.

7) If that be the position then, in our opinion, the

property, which is subject matter of this appeal,

should also necessarily be subjected to its

adjudication in OS No.46/1986 along with other

properties. In any event, in our view, it would be just

and proper that all properties belonging to or claim to

belonging to the family or/and its members though

denied by the parties against each other should be

3 made subject matter of one civil suit rather than two

civil suits.

8) It is for this reason, we do not consider it proper

to express any opinion on the rights of the parties so

far as the suit property in question is concerned and

grant liberty to the parties of this appeal to amend

their pleadings in OS No.46/1986 in relation to the

suit property in question in addition to the properties

which are already part of OS No. 46/1986 so that the

concerned Trial Court will be able to decide the rights

of the parties in relation to the entire properties

including the one in question in this appeal.

9) We, therefore, set aside all the three

judgments/decrees, i.e., judgments/decrees passed

by Trial Court, First Appellate Court and Second

Appellate Court out of which this appeal arises and

grant liberty to the parties to amend their respective

pleadings in civil suit O.S. No.46/1986 by including

4 the suit property of the present appeal in the pending

civil suit (O.S.No.46/1986).

10) The Trial Court will then proceed to decide the

suit (O.S.No.46/1986) expeditiously by framing

additional issues, if required, in relation to the

properties in question on the basis of amended

pleadings and will also allow the parties to file

documents and lead evidence in support of their

pleadings including amended pleadings.

11) The Trial Court will decide the suit strictly in

accordance with law uninfluenced by any of the

observations made by the Courts below in this case.

12) Let the trial of civil suit (OS No.46/1986) be

completed within one year.

5

13) With these observations and directions, the

appeal stands disposed of.

………...................................J. [ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE]

…...……..................................J. [S. ABDUL NAZEER]

New Delhi;

August 10, 2018

6