GURMIT SINGH BHATIA Vs. KIRAN KANT ROBINSON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 3.7.2013 passed in Writ Petition No. 856/2012 and order dated 5.8.2013 passed in Review Petition No. 169/2013 in Writ Petition No. 856/2012 by the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, by which the High Court has allowed the said writ petition preferred by the original plaintiffs and has quashed and set aside the order passed by the learned trial Court allowing the application preferred by the appellant herein for impleading him as a necessary party to the suit filed by respondent nos. 2 & 3 herein - the original plaintiffs, the original applicant - appellant has preferred the present appeals.

(2.) The facts of the case leading to these appeals in nutshell are as follows:

(3.) Shri Prashanto Chandra Sen, learned Senior Advocate has appeared on behalf of the appellant and Shri M. Shoeb Alam, learned Advocate has appeared on behalf of the original plaintiffs. 3.1 Learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant has vehemently submitted that once the learned trial Court allowed the impleadment application submitted by the appellant herein under Order 1 Rule 10 of the C.P.C. holding that the appellant is a necessary and proper party, the High Court, in exercise of powers under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, ought not to have interfered with the same.