JAIDEEP GUPTA Vs. INDER CHAND JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Withdrawal of a withdrawal application?

(2.) Whether a plaintiff can withdraw 'an application to withdraw the suit'-isa question arising for decision. Jaideep, Sandeep and Smt Pushpa are respectivelythe two sons and the wife of one Sudhir Kumar Gupta who is defendant No. 2. Itappears that defendant No. 2 has made an alienation of the suit property in favourof Inder Chand Jain, the defendant No. 1. According to the plaintiffs, SudhirKumar defendant No. 2 had only one-eighth share in the property which wasancestral in character. The alienation is sought to be avoided by seeking a decree ofdeclaration that the same was void and not binding on the co-parcenery.

(3.) The suit was in progress when on 14.12.1993, Jaideep Gupta, plaintiff No.I filed an application under Order 23 Rule 1 read with Section 151 Civil Procedure Code wherein hemade the following prayers : "(i) the plaintiff-applicant be kindly allowed towithdraw the abovenoted suit and the same be dismissed as withdrawn; (ii) thename of the applicant be deleted from the array of the plaintiffs". This applicationwas accompanied by yet another application under Section 151 Civil Procedure Code requesting theCourt to record the oral statement of the plaintiff-applicant Jaideep Gupta insupport of his application filed under Order 23 Rule 1 read with Section 151 CPC.