LATHA VENKATESH, W/O.R B.N. VENKATESH Vs. SRI S.V. NAGARAJA SETTY S/O LATA SREENIVASA SETTY, SMT. S.V. SULOCHANA D/O LATE SREENIVASA SETTY, SMT. THARA D/O LATE DASHARATHA AND SRI D. SRINATH S/O LATE DASHARATHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE 1st Respondent/Plaintiff has filed suit against the 2nd Respondent and the Petitioner seeking declaratory and consequential reliefs. The Petitioner who is the 2nd Defendant in the suit has contested the suit by filing written statement. Issues have been framed and the trial of the suit has commenced. The 1st Respondent/Plaintiff filed I.A.3 seeking impleading of Respondents 3 and 4. According to the Plaintiff, there is a bequeath made by Venkatamma both in favour of the Plaintiff and his brother late Dasaratha. Finding that, the children of Dasaratha are necessary parties to the suit, the Plaintiff filed an application to bring Respondents 3 and 4 on record. The Petitioner who is the 2nd Defendant filed statement of objections and opposed the prayer. However, the Trial Court finding merit in the application has allowed the same and has permitted the Plaintiff to implead Respondents 3 and 4 as Defendants 3 and 4. Feeling aggrieved, the 2nd Defendant has filed this writ petition.

(2.) SRI Javahar Babu, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner would contend that the presence of 3rd and 4th Respondents is unnecessary for adjudication of real question in controversy. The learned Counsel submits that the suit is at the stage of cross -examination of PW.1 which the Plaintiff has been avoiding despite the matter having been posted for the said purpose repeatedly. Learned Counsel submits that, the impleading of 3rd and 4th Defendants would further delay the disposal of the suit

(3.) THE Plaintiff has based his suit on the basis of a testament made by late Venkatamma. According to the Plaintiff, the testator has made the bequeath in favour of himself and late Dasaratha i.e., his brother. The impleaded persons have not made any claim in respect of the suit property. However, they are proper parties to the proceedings for effectively adjudicating the matter. In that view, the Trial Court is justified in allowing the application for impleadmerit and in passing the impugned order.