S. Muthuraman (died) and 2 others vs Dhanaradja and 11 others

P.D. Dinakaran, J.—Heard.

The above revision is preferred against the order dated 22.11.1993 in I.A. No. 3880 of 1993 in O.S. No. 706 of 1991, on the file of the II

Additional District Munsif, Pondicherry, dismissing the application, seeking amendment in the plaint schedule property, of course, including certain

additional items in the suit property in O.S. No. 706 of 1997, specifying more details as to the schedule, survey No. and extent. However, the

same was rejected by the learned District Munsif on the ground that it creates a fresh cause of action.

In my considered opinion, there is no substance in rejecting the amendment application by the learned District munsif on the ground that it

creates a fresh cause of action, as it will not prevent or take away the right of revision petitioner/applicant to seek independent proceedings with

regard to the additional items of the property, in which event, I am satisfied to permit the revision petitioner to amend the schedule mentioned

property in order to avoid multiplicity of litigations, and therefore, I am obliged to set aside the order of the learned II Additional District Munsif,

Pondicherry dated 22.11.1993 in I.A. No. 3880 of 1993 in O.S. No. 706 of 1991.

I direct the learned II Additional District Munsif, Pondicherry, to conduct the trial and dispose of the suit in O.S. No. 706 of 1991 within six

months from the date of receipt of this order, after giving sufficient time to the respondents to file additional written statement.

In the result, the revision is allowed with the above direction. No costs.