RAM KRISHNA GHOSH Vs. ROOP CHAND MOLLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the original suit Tarak Muchi (Ruidas) and Patasi Dasi were the only two arrayed defendants. Likewise, plaintiffs were two in number, being subimal Krishna Ghosh and Bijoy Krishna Ghosh. The suit of the plaintiffs was decreed by the trial court which decree was confirmed by the lower appellate court. The High court in second appeal reversed the same. The instant appeal is by the plaintiffs. Surprisingly, in the Special Leave Petition the two defendants aforesaid have not, by neglect or design, been impleaded as parties. On the contrary, the persons impleaded have pointed out the defect and have moved civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 3151 of 1983 for addition of respondents and for revocation of leave.

(2.) On hearing learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the records, we find that a grave error has been committed by the appellants in not impleading the original defendants as parties herein who had contested the suit. In the absence of those contesting parties before us, the appeal cannot proceed. We, therefore, not only dismiss Civil Miscellaneous petition No. 3151 of 1983 but also the appeal as well, as no relief can be granted to the appellants in the absence of necessary parties.