ANUJ GOEL Vs. S.S. BAKSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is directed against an order dated 8.8.2007 passed by the Civil Judge, Delhi dismissing an application preferred by the petitioner/intervenor under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking his impleadment in a suit filed by the respondent(plaintiff in the court below) for mandatory injunction against the respondents No. 2 & 3 (defendants), calling upon them to execute and register a conveyance deed, in respect of premises bearing No. E-18, Greater Kailash Enclave, Part-I, Delhi in his favour and converting the suit property from leasehold to freehold.

(2.) By way of the aforesaid application, the petitioner sought his impleadment in the suit proceedings on various grounds, including the ground that he is the owner of the suit property. The said application came to be dismissed on 8.8.2007 on various grounds, including the ground that the suit in question was instituted by the respondent No. 1 in the year 1996 and though the petitioner claimed to have purchased the suit property in the same year and despite previous litigations between the parties, he did not chose to be arrayed as a party in the suit for such a long period of time.

(3.) The present petition is also accompanied by an application (CM No. 10196/2008) seeking condonation of delay of 232 days in re-filing the petition. Counsels for the respondents state that the present petition was listed in the Court by the Registry with an objection with regard to its maintainability and in fact, the present Revision Petition is not maintainable. Counsel for the petitioner disputes the said position and argues that the present petition is maintainable as no appeal lies against an order of the aforesaid nature, under Order 43 of the CPC.