RADHEY SHYAM Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE CHITRAKOOT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition the order dated 5.9.2000 passed by the learned District Judge, Chitrakoot. allowing the Revision Application No. 36 of 1999 whereby the order dated 29.9.2000 passed by the trial court in Suit No. 10 of 1990 has been challenged.

(2.) Heard Sri K. S. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner-Radhey Shyam who happens to be defendant No. 3 in the original suit as well as Sri Iqbal Ahmad, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

(3.) Suit No. 10 of 1990 was instituted by respondent No. 3 Ayodhya for the relief of partition of his l/4th share in the disputed property. It was alleged that the property in question was purchased jointly by Ram Adhar and Gaya Prasad. Radhey Shyam alias Radhey Lal-petitioner, and Jogesh the present respondent No. 6 are the sons of Ram Adhar while plaintiff-respondent No. 3-Ayodhya and Bhola Prasad-respondent No. 4 are the sons of Gaya Prasad. The suit was ordered to proceed ex parte against the defendant No. 4-Jogesh (presently respondent No. 6 who is real brother of the present petitioner). Jogesh was later on allowed to file the written statement and the order to proceed the case ex parte against him was recalled. Thereupon, the present petitioner-defendant moved an application under Section 88Ka for transposition of his brother Jogesh-defendant No. 4 as co-plaintiff on the ground that his interest is identical to that of the plaintiff-respondent No. 3. This application for transposition was allowed by the trial court on 29.9.1999. Against this order, the plaintiff-respondent No. 3 filed a Revision Application No. 36 of 1999 which has been allowed and the application moved by the present petitioner for transposition was rejected. It is in these circumstances that the defendant No. 3 has come before this Court as petitioner to challenge the order rejecting his application for transposition of his brother Jogesh defendant No. 4 as co-plaintiff.