M.S. Rukmini vs M. Sornalatha

K. Ravichandra Baabu, J.—This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the Order dated 17.9.2014 I.A. No. 16838 of 2013 in O.S. No. 6220 of 2011 on the file of VI Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai, in allowing the Application filed by the Respondents under Order 6, Rule 17, CPC to amend the Plaint.

The Revision Petitioners herein are the Defendants in the said Suit tiled for Partition. Pending Suit, the Respondents herein (Plaintiffs) filed the said Application for amendment of the Plaint seeking to include some more items in the Suit Schedule properties by contending that they were not aware of all the ancestral properties belonging to the family or about then actual location and their erstwhile Counsel was not acting in their interest and pressurized, them for settling the matter. The said Application was resisted by the Defendants. The Court below allowed the Application by holding that in a Suit for Partition, all the properties are to be included and therefore, the amendment neither changes the cause of action nor the character of the Suit in any manner. The Application was in fact allowed on payment of costs of Rs.750/- to the Defendants.

Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners/Defendants submitted that no due diligence is shown by the Plaintiffs in seeking the amendment of the Plaint.

Considering the fact that the above said Suit was filed for Partition and that all the properties which are claimed to be partitioned, are necessarily to be included in the Suit Schedule and in order to arrive at a just and proper conclusion in respect of all the properties, no prejudice would be caused to the Defendants if those properties are also included in the Suit Schedule. It is needless to say that by including the properties in the Suit Schedule, it does not mean that the claim of the parties in respect of those properties is also accepted by the Court. It is only after trial, the claim of the Plaintiffs in respect of all the Suit items has to be considered and decided, and therefore, by including those properties, the interest of all the parties is taken care of. Accordingly, I find that the impugned Order of the Court below does not warrant any interference.

Consequently, the Civil Revision Petition fails and the same is dismissed. No costs The Miscellaneous Petition is closed.