w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Gandhimathi, Rep. By her Power Agent, Venkatesan v/s Murugappan & Another


Company & Directors' Information:- U. P. POWER CORPORATION LIMITED [Active] CIN = U32201UP1999SGC024928

Company & Directors' Information:- D B POWER LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40109MP2006PLC019008

Company & Directors' Information:- INDIA POWER CORPORATION LIMITED [Active] CIN = L40105WB1919PLC003263

Company & Directors' Information:- INDIA POWER CORPORATION LIMITED [Amalgamated] CIN = U40101WB2003PLC097340

Company & Directors' Information:- B L A POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40102MH2006PTC165430

Company & Directors' Information:- L V S POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40100TG1996PTC023552

Company & Directors' Information:- S L S POWER CORPORATION LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40109AP2005PLC047008

Company & Directors' Information:- S L V POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40102KA2002PTC030448

Company & Directors' Information:- S. E. POWER LIMITED [Active] CIN = L40106GJ2010PLC091880

Company & Directors' Information:- E O S POWER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U32109MH1985PTC037094

Company & Directors' Information:- D C POWER LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40109TG1996PLC025996

Company & Directors' Information:- POWER CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED [Amalgamated] CIN = U50101WB1997PLC084060

Company & Directors' Information:- B V POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40106DL2011PTC213428

Company & Directors' Information:- R AND H POWER COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51109UP1965PTC003067

Company & Directors' Information:- B R POWER LTD [Active] CIN = U40106WB1995PLC073567

Company & Directors' Information:- N M S POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51109WB1999PTC089747

Company & Directors' Information:- P R B POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40101TG1995PTC020647

Company & Directors' Information:- S V G POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40300AP2012PTC084435

Company & Directors' Information:- INDIA POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U31900DL1995PTC070096

Company & Directors' Information:- M POWER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U31908MH2012PTC234343

Company & Directors' Information:- A N S INDIA POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51101DL2014PTC266873

Company & Directors' Information:- M M K POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40106AP1998PTC030796

Company & Directors' Information:- C R E M POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40101DL2001PTC111631

Company & Directors' Information:- D T POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40300AP2015PTC097226

Company & Directors' Information:- O L G POWER P LTD [Active] CIN = U30007TN1991PTC020898

Company & Directors' Information:- G S POWER LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40102KA2010PLC054033

Company & Directors' Information:- POWER AND POWER PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U31300AS1989PTC003282

Company & Directors' Information:- P D M POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40104AS2014PTC011780

Company & Directors' Information:- S B S POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40100AP2012PTC083965

Company & Directors' Information:- B & G POWER LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40105PB2010PLC033765

Company & Directors' Information:- S POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U19202DL1986PTC026505

Company & Directors' Information:- G M POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40105PN2003PTC017857

Company & Directors' Information:- POWER INDIA PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U31102WB1983PTC036315

Company & Directors' Information:- S AND S POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40109PY2004PTC001824

Company & Directors' Information:- U S POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Under Process of Striking Off] CIN = U40103MH2009PTC189364

Company & Directors' Information:- K P M POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40102KA2008PTC046804

Company & Directors' Information:- POWER-X PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U99999DL1970PTC005331

Company & Directors' Information:- S K POWER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U31101KA2006PTC039172

Company & Directors' Information:- R G D POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U41000TG1996PTC023809

Company & Directors' Information:- M M R POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U31104DL2008PTC174079

Company & Directors' Information:- S J POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U45207HR2012PTC045937

Company & Directors' Information:- T C POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40101PB2009PTC033405

Company & Directors' Information:- H. & T. POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40106MH2016PTC287646

Company & Directors' Information:- S & O POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40107MH2010PTC206447

Company & Directors' Information:- V D M-POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999MH2015PTC262999

Company & Directors' Information:- A C R POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74900UP2010PTC040987

Company & Directors' Information:- W N POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40101JK2013PTC004009

Company & Directors' Information:- C K S POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40101KA2010PTC052199

Company & Directors' Information:- G C I POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40107KA2010PTC053656

Company & Directors' Information:- R. C. POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40100GJ2009PTC058005

Company & Directors' Information:- J R J POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U40300GJ2015PTC082396

Company & Directors' Information:- D V N POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U40101TG2007PTC053069

Company & Directors' Information:- A. R. POWER PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74999DL2007PTC161616

    C.R.P.(PD)(MD). Nos. 1863 & 1872 of 2017 & C.M.P.(MD). Nos. 9743 & 9759 of 2017

    Decided On, 24 August 2021

    At, Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court

    By, THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE R. THARANI

    For the Petitioner: A.V. Arun, Advocate. For the Respondents: B. Sekar, Advocate.



Judgment Text

(Common Prayer: These Civil Revision Petitions have been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the order dated 25.07.2017 made in I.A.Nos.1398 of 2016 and 351 of 2017 in O.S.Nos.294 of 2013 and 293 of 2013, on the file of the learned District Munsif, Pudukottai.)Common Order1. This petition has been filed against the order passed in I.A.Nos.1398 of 2016 and 351 of 2017 in O.S.Nos.294 of 2013 and 293 of 2013, dated 25.07.2017, on the file of the learned District Munsif, Pudukottai.2. The petitioners in both C.R.Ps. are the plaintiffs and the respondents herein are the defendants in the suit. The petitioners have filed suits in O.S.Nos. 294 of 2013 and 293 of 2013, for permanent injunction not to disturb the possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff unless under due process of law. Pending suits, the petitioners herein has filed an applications in I.A.Nos.1398 of 2016 and 351 of 2017 to strike off the plaint.3. A brief substance of the petitions in I.A.Nos.1398 of 2016 and 351 of 2017 is as follows:The petitioners have filed suits for permanent injunction with regard to B schedule property which is described as follows:“TAMIL”The petitioner purchased A schedule property on 26.06.1974 from one Mangai Atchi. Subsequently, he purchased B schedule property by way of oral purchase. Mangai Atchi sold the property to Natarajan and from him, the petitioners purchased the property and that the particulars mentioned in Paragraph no.4 of the plaint. The petitioner claimed adverse possession. Since the petitioners are not aware of the legal position and nothing in the plaint about adverse possession was stated and hence, the plaint has to be amended.4. Brief substance of the counter filed by the respondent is as follows:It is wrong to state that the petitioners purchased B schedule property by way of oral purchase. The petitioners cannot claim adverse possession. Hence, the correction sought out by the petitioners will change the entire nature of the suit and the petition has to be dismissed.5. After hearing both sides, the learned District Munsif, Pudukottai dismissed the petitions. Against which, the petitioners have filed the Civil Revision Petitions.6. Since both the petitions are similar in nature, C.R.P.(MD)No.1863 of 2017 is taken as the lead case.7. On the side of the revision petitioner, it is stated that the petitioner is entitled to amend the plaint before the commencement of the trial. Without properly analyzing the scope, the learned District Munsif made an observation that adverse possession should not be sought as a sword and can be sought only as a shield. The parties are at liberty to make alternative remedies in the plaint. The basis of petitioner's claim on is possession. Possession of the plaintiff was admitted by the first respondent in his written statement, he only claimed that he sold the property to the second respondent. The second respondent was also impleaded as the party. Whether the petitioner are in adverse possession has to be decided only after the trial.8. On the side of the petitioner, it is further stated that the vendor of the petitioner's vendor was in possession of B schedule property. Then, the vendor of the petitioner was in possession. Subsequently, the petitioner is in possession of B schedule property. This is only a pre-trial amendment. If needed, the respondents can file additional written statement. In support of his contention, the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ravinder Kaur Grewal and others v. Mangit Kaur and others reported in 2019 8 SCC 729 is cited.9. On the side of the revision petitioner, it is stated that the pre-trial amendment should be liberally permitted by the trial Court. In support of his contention, a judgment passed by this Court in the case of O.P.Ravindran v. M.S.Subbaiah and D.S.Damodaran reported in 2021 (3) CTC 274 is cited.10. On the side of the respondents, it is stated that the petitioner is trying to introduce a new case. There is no new cause of action. The original cause of action narrated by the petitioner is lapsed. In support of his contention, the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gurdwara Sahib v. Gram Panchayat Village Sirthala and another reported in 2014 1 SCC 669.11. On the side of the petitioner, it is stated that the character of the suit was not changed. The plaintiff has narrated that he purchased the A schedule property and he was given the possession of B schedule property. The petitioner is now elaborating the claim. Only possession was claimed by the petitioner. Now the petitioner seek for title through adverse possession.12. On the side of the respondents, it is stated that the petitioner claim title through one Adaikammai Achi but A schedule property belong to one Chellaiah. Muthuaiah has executed a general power deed in favour of the respondents and the respondents divided the property as house sites and sold the same to many persons for valuable consideration. The second respondent is one such purchaser. The first respondent is the absolute owner of the property. The first respondent was in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the property. The properties of the second respondent was lying fallow and one Adaikkamai and the petitioner colluded together and stealthily occupied the above said properties of the second respondent without her knowledge. The second respondent is having no right to continue in illegal occupation. The petitioner and her vendor Adaikkamai Achi are land grabbers and they have no valid title in the schedule property. Oral purchase of B schedule property by the petitioner is false and prayed the petition to be dismissed.13. The verification of the records reveals that the suit was filed for bare injunction with regard to B schedule property. The claim of the petitioner is that he purchased the B schedule property by way of an oral sale. Now the plaintiff wants to claim title through adverse possession. Originally the plaintiff claim right by way of sale a prayer of ownership through adverse possession is contradictory to

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

the original case. When filing a suit for adverse possession, the title of the other side should be admitted by the plaintiff. The case of the plaintiff in the original plaint is that title is by way of oral purchase. Now the plaintiff wants to change the entire nature of the case, which cannot be entertained.14. In the above circumstance, there is nothing sufficient enough to interfere in the order passed in I.A.Nos.1398 of 2016 and 351 of 2017 in O.S.Nos.294 of 2013 and 293 of 2013, dated 25.07.2017, on the file of the learned District Munsif, Pudukottai. These Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
O R