T SRINIVASA MURTHY Vs. RUKMINI R

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has called in question, the order dated 9.12.2011, passed by the trial court in O.S.No.4254/2010 on I.A.No.5.

(2.) BY the impugned order, the trial court has dismissed I.A.No.5.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the impugned order cannot be sustained in law. He also submitted that the proposed defendants i.e., the owner and the agreement holders Sri. Dayananda and Sri. Ramanna are necessary parties to the proceedings and therefore, the trial court was not justified in rejecting the application. He, therefore, submitted that the impugned order cannot be sustained in law.