HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No:5598 OF 2010 Dated: 10.12.2010 Between: Tikkisetty Tejo Naga Jyothi. ..Petitioner And 1. Motepalli Srinivasa Rao and others .. Respondents This Court made the following HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No:5598 OF 2010 ORDER: This is a revision filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to revise the order dated 30.09.2010 passed in I.A.No.693 of 2010 in O.S.No.104 of 2008 by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. The revision petitioner is the 2nd defendant and 1st respondent is the plaintiff and respondents 2 and 3 are defendants 1 and 3 in the suit. For the sake of convenience, the status of the parties will hereinafter be referred to as arrayed in the suit. The plaintiff filed the above suit for permanent injunction restraining the 1st defendant and his men from interfering with the peaceful and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property. This suit is coming for arguments along with O.S.No.112 of 2008, which is filed by the revision petitioner herein for declaration of title and permanent injunction in respect of the property in question on the ground that the defendant Nos.1 & 3 in the present suit viz., O.S.No.104 of 2008 executed a registered gift deed dated 20.8.2007. While so, the plaintiff filed the above application seeking to implead defendants 2 and 3 as legal representatives of the deceased 1st defendant on the ground that they are trying to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff. The Court below having found that the revision petitioner herein is claiming right over the property as granddaughter of the deceased 1st defendant and therefore, there is no wrong in impleading her as a party to the suit, allowed the I.A. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision has been filed. Heard the learned Counsel and perused the material available on record. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is only the grand daughter of the deceased 1st defendant and she is not a Class I heir and merely because she filed a suit for the relief of declaration and injunction against the plaintiff, it cannot be taken as a ground to implead her as legal representative of the deceased 1st defendant and she cannot be considered as a legal representative when her father-3rd defendant, who can alone be considered as legal representative, is on record. Originally, the present suit is filed for the relief of permanent injunction against the 1st defendant in respect of the property in question. On the death of the 1st defendant, the plaintiff filed the above application on the ground that defendants 2 and 3 are the legal heirs of the deceased and they are trying to interfere with the property in question. It is not in dispute that the revision petitioner is the granddaughter of the 1st defendant and she is claiming right over the property in question through a gift deed alleged to have been executed in her favour by defendant No.3 and deceased 1st defendant. Since it is a suit for permanent injunction, any person who is claiming right through the deceased, can be impleaded. In view of the fact that the revision petitioner is claiming right over the property in question and in view of the nature of the suit, I feel that the order of the Court below does not cause any prejudice to either of the parties and further, it is helpful for adjudication of the matter effectively, and hence, the order under revision needs no interference. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________________ Justice A. Gopal Reddy Date: 10th December, 2010 Nn. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No:5598 OF 2010 10.12.2010