IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27.10.2006 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SATHASIVAM C.R.P.(PD)No.473 of 2006 1.K.Kumarasamy 2.K.Ravi .. Petitioners Vs. 1.Vasanthi @ Jayanthi 2.M.Arasu .. Respondents Civil Revision Petition under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code against the fair and decreetal order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Poonamallee dated 28.11.2005 in I.A.No.748 of 2005 in O.S.No.29 of 2004. For petitioner : Mr.Bharath Chakravarthy For respondents : Mr.M.L.Ramesh ORDER
The only grievance of the petitioners/defendants as referred to in the impugned order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Poonamallee, is that the first respondent/plaintiff are not entitled to file a copy of the partition deed dated 02.11.1995 when the existence of the said partition deed itself is denied. It is seen from the affidavit filed in support of the application before the Sub Court, Poonamallee, that after making necessary averment in the plaint, the learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff issued notice directing the defendants to produce the original partition deed dated 02.11.1995. Since there was no compliance, the plaintiff has filed an application for the same. By the impugned order, the learned Subordinate Judge after finding that the plaintiff is having a copy of the same, though the defendants denied the execution of the suit partition deed, permitted the plaintiff to file a copy of the partition deed dated 02.11.1995. It is made clear that merely because the learned Subordinate Judge has permitted the plaintiff to file the copy of the partition deed, it does not mean that the genuineness of the said document is accepted. In other words, it is for the plaintiff to establish the fact that there was a partition on 02.11.1995 among the first defendant and his brothers. When such remedy is available and the same can be decided at the time of trial, I do not find any valid ground to interfere with the impugned order at this stage.
2. With the above observation, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs.
1. TheSubordinate Judge,
2. The Record Keeper,