E. SHIVAPRAKASH Vs. ANASUYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner is the applicant whose application to implead himself has been rejected. The background to the same is as follows:

(2.) THE petitioner's father is said to have purchased one item of the suit property from defendants 2 and 3. This transaction had taken place before the institution of the suit for partition and separate possession. However, the petitioner's father was arraigned as the defendant no. 6 It transpires, during the pendency of the suit, defendant no. 6, the father of the petitioner had executed a gift deed in favour of the present petitioner and in the suit, he had filed a memo to state that he is no longer interested in the suit property. It is in this background that the present petitioner filed an application to come on record and had invoked Order I Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Hereinafter referred to as the 'CPC', for brevity) That application having been rejected, the petitioner is before this court.