KELANKUTTY Vs. NAYADI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order under challenge is one by which the court below has allowed the petition filed by the respondents under O.1 R.10 C. P. C.

(2.) The case of the petitioner briefly stated is this: The suit instituted by the first respondent is not maintainable as the promissory note which is the basis for the suit, is not one executed in favour of the first respondent. The first respondent has also no case that he is a holder in due course. Under these circumstances there is no need to implead the second respondent as an additional plaintiff. The application under O.1 R.10 C. P. C. seeking impleadment of the second respondent as the additional plaintiff is liable to be dismissed.

(3.) The case of the first respondent discernible from the petition for impleading is that the suit has been instituted in the name of a wrong person as the plaintiff and the suit happened to be instituted thus through a bona fide mistake. For the determination of the real issue, the junction of the second respondent is indispensable is the further case of the respondents.