S KARUNAMBIKA Vs. K RAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioner/petitioner/proposed party has filed this present civil revision petition as against the order dated 25.9.2008 in I.A.SR.No.2272 of 2008 in O.S.No.410 of 2005 passed by the learned Additional District Judge(Fast Track Court No.3), Coimbatore in rejecting the application filed under Order 1 Rule 10(2) and Section 151 of CPC.

(2.) THE trial Court, while rejecting the interlocutory application at the unnumbered stage, has inter alia opined that the revision petitioner/petitioner/plaintiff cannot seek any relief in the suit in O.S.No.410 o 2005 filed by the respondents 1 and 2 against the 3rd respondent/defendant therein and the petitioner has to work out his remedy by filing a separate suit and not by impleading himself as a party in the suit and resultantly rejected the application.

(3.) AT this stage, it is to be noted that in a civil suit filed by the plaintiff, generally, the plaintiff is the dominus litus. However, this is not an absolute rule. As a matter of fact, the object of Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC is to avoid plurality of the proceedings. But in a suit for specific performance, admittedly, the parties to the contract are the proper and necessary parties in the considered opinion of this Court.