AMRUTBHAI LALLUBHAI RABARI Vs. BHIMJIBHAI UKABHAI VAGHASIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is before this Court being aggrieved by order passed below exh. 330 in Special Civil Suit No. 2 of 2002 dated 1st October 2009 by learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bardoli, whereby, the application is dismissed. By exh. 330, the present petitioner - original plaintiff no. 2 had sought for certain amendments. The learned Judge declined those amendments, more particularly, on the ground that the present petitioner - original plaintiff no. 2 was in know of the suit and still, after having a Sale Deed executed in his favour by plaintiff no. 1 in the year 2006, he moved an application for being impleaded as party only in the year 2008, which was allowed by the Court. That order was challenged before this Court, wherein, this Court, by judgment and order dated 22nd June 2009, dismissed the challenge and thus, allowed the present petitioner to be the original plaintiff no. 2. The Court has rejected exh. 330 on the ground that the present petitioner - original plaintiff no. 2 could have sought for the amendments at that time, instead of that, the petitioner waited to move the amendment application till 11th September 2009. Before that he filed another application exh. 323 for recasting the Issues, which too, came to be dismissed and that order is not challenged by the present petitioner.

(2.) The learned advocate Mr. Gandhi for the respondents vehemently submitted that the petitioner - original plaintiff no. 2 is deliberately acting in a manner so as to see that the Special Civil Suit No. 2 of 2002 does not come to an end. This Court is of the opinion that there is substance in the submission made by the learned advocate Mr. Gandhi. Even if that is so, fact remains that entertaining this petition and putting it for final hearing, will result into further delay of the disposal of the suit. This Court is also conscious of the fact that while admitting the petition, wherein the question is as to whether the petitioner is entitled to have amendments in the suit or not, the Court below cannot be directed to decide the suit. Hence, it is deemed fit that this petition be finally heard and amendments be allowed to be carried out and the Court below be directed to hear the suit as expeditiously as possible, preferably within shortest time.

(3.) Rule. Learned advocate Mr. Gandhi for the respondents waives service of Rule. For the submissions made by learned advocate Mr. Patel for the petitioner and in view of the observations made by this Court hereinabove, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner - original plaintiff no. 2 is directed to carry out the amendments on or before 28th June 2010. Reply, if any, to those amendments, be filed by the present respondents - original defendants on or before 12th July 2010. The Court below is directed to decide the suit as expeditiously as possible but not later than six months from 12th July 2010.