AMAR NATH SHROFF Vs. SAVITRI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Anoop Trivedi, learned Counsel for the revisionist and Sri Gajendra Pratap Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri S.C. Pandey, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

(2.) This revision has been preferred under Section 115 Code of Civil Procedure against an order dated 27.5.2011 passed by Civil Judge (S.D.), Allahabad on application No. 29-Ga in original suit No. 499 of 2009 Savitri Singh v. Kamla Jha. By means of the impugned order, the trial Court has allowed certain amendment in the plaint and has also impleaded certain persons as Defendants including the present revisionist namely "Amar Nath Shroff".

(3.) Sri Anoop Trivedi, learned Counsel for the revisionist contended that entire suit filed by the Plaintiffs-Respondents was wholly a gross abuse of process of law inasmuch as the Plaintiffs-Respondents launched litigation on various occasions upto the Apex Court and had relied on certain compromise decree which has been allegedly in force and in respect of same an application was also filed by the revisionist which is pending for final orders. The revisionist is neither necessary nor proper party in the matter therefore, the impugned order could not have been passed. He placed reliance on a judgment of Apex Court in Kasturi v. Iyyamperumal and Ors., 2005 6 SCC 733.