N.G. MUNIYAPPA Vs. SRI KRISHNAPPA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 26.09.2013 passed in OS No. 218/2006 by the learned Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Hoskote, vide Annexure -A. By the said order, the Trial Court has dismissed the application filed by the present petitioner under Order -I Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking his impleadment as additional defendant. The main contention of the petitioner, is that he has filed a suit in OS No. 430/2005 seeking declaration of title and for permanent injunction in respect of the very same property and it is pending on the file of the I Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore. He has urged that in the present suit also, respondents 6 and 7 herein, who are the plaintiffs are seeking declaration of their title over the very same property and if he is not permitted to come on record there will be legally inconsistent judgment and it may adversely affect the interest of the petitioner. The Trial Court has rejected the application holding that, the presence of the petitioner is not necessary for the effective disposal of the dispute raised in the suit.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein was not aware of the pendency of the suit in OS No. 218/2006. Therefore, he seeks to allow the application in the interest of justice permitting the petitioner to come on record as additional defendant, which will sub -serve the interest of the petitioner.

(3.) I have gone through the arguments adduced by the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the pleadings and other materials available on record including the order -sheet maintained by the Presiding officer in OS No. 218/2006 which is made available for perusal by the counsel appearing for the respondents who has filed an application for vacating the interim order.