HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No:2295 OF 2011 ORDER: This is a revision filed by the petitioner-1st defendant challenging the order dated 7.4.2011 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Puttur, in I.A.No.292 of 2010 in O.S.No.1 of 2006. The 4th respondent herein is the plaintiff. She filed the suit in O.S.No.1 of 2006 for partition of the suit properties into six equal shares by metes and bounds and allot one such share to her and to put her in separate possession of the same, and the said suit is pending. While so, the respondents 1 to 3 herein, who are legal heirs of Kanthamma-sister of the plaintiff, filed I.A.No.292 of 2010 seeking to implead them as parties to the suit. It is their case that the 1st respondent herein is the husband and respondents 2 and 3 herein are the sons of the said Kanthamma and that the said Kanthamma, plaintiff and defendants 1 to 5 are children of K. Subba Naidu and they constitute the Hindu Joint Family and the plaintiff and defendants colluded together and did not add Kanthamma as a party to the suit and therefore, they may be permitted to come on record as defendants 6 to 8. The Court below allowed the said application. Aggrieved by the same, the 1st defendant filed the present revision. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record. On a perusal of the material on record, it is clear that the plaintiff had shown the said Kanthamma as her sister in the pleadings, but she did not make her as a party to the suit on the ground that the marriage of the said Kanthamma was performed long back and her father Subba Naidu gave some property to her as Gift. It is an admitted fact that the said Kanthamma is the daughter of Subba Naidu and the property in question is a joint family property. The question as to whether she was given any property as gift or not and whether she is entitled to any share in the property or not, is to be decided after full-fledged trial, but not at this stage of the proceedings. In view of the nature of the suit, all the heirs of the said K. Subba Naidu, should come on record. Since the said Kanthamma is no more, her legal heirs can be added as parties. In these circumstances, I have no hesitation to hold that the order under revision does not suffer from any illegality or irregularity warranting interference by this Court and hence, the revision is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. __________________ Justice N.V. Ramana Date:15th July, 2011 Nn. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No:2295 OF 2011 15.7.2011 Nn