RANAMMA Vs. RUDRAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner whose impleading application has been rejected, is invoking the writ jurisdiction of this court for assailing the order dated 21.04.2018 made by the trial court in respondent's civil suit in O.S.No.1429/2006. After service of notice, the 1st respondent has entered appearance through his counsel, other respondents having remained unrepresented, resists the Writ Petition.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the subject property which is now sought to be included in the suit proceeding by virtue of amendment of pleadings, is nothing but the land in earlier Sy.No.64 that was gifted to the petitioner by his mother by a registered Gift Deed dated 11.09.2017, which survey number has been altered after the Durasti work and therefore, his impleading application filed under Order I Rule 10(2) of CPC, 1908, ought to have been favoured on the ground of he being a proper and necessary party.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent/plaintiff made submissions in justification of the impugned order stating that there is no vinculum juris between the property and the Writ Petitioner; he has not produced necessary material to show that the property comprised in the alleged Gift Deed and the one in the suit are identical. So contending, he seeks dismissal of the Writ Petition.