SARWARI BEGUM Vs. ABDUL MAJID

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPLICANT Smt. Sarwari Begum, who is plaintiff in ' Original Suit No. 63 of 1985 instituted by her in the court of Civil Judge, Aligarh in which Abdul Mukim and Smt. Amina Begum were impleaded by her as defendants, has approached this Court for relief against the order passed by the learned Civil Judge on October 7, 1985. By this order, the learned Judge permitted some persons to be impleaded as defendants in the suit after the court had verified the compromise between the plaintiff and the two defendants. The court below felt that, inasmuch as, the applicants for impleadment claim a share in the property in suit, they should be permitted to be impleaded so that complete justice may be done in the matter.

(2.) THE revision was filed in this Court with considerable delay. In the application made under section 5 of the Limitation Act, the plaintiff-applicant has explained the reasons why she could not approach the court earlier. THE parties who have been permitted to be impleaded as defendants in the suit by the impugned order, have appeared in this Court. THEy have opposed the prayer for condonation of delay. Sri Pankaj Misra, appearing for the plaintiff-applicant, who has argued the case with ability, urged that it was open to this court, if it was otherwise satisfied, to exercise revisional powers suo motu irrespective of the fact that the applicant had approached this Court beyond the period of limitation. He has placed reliance upon the decisions in Katragadda China Ramayya v. Chiruvella Venkanraju, AIR 1954 Madras 864 ; Ramchandra v. Pannalal, AIR 1954 Rajasthan 191 and Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Girdharilal Sapru, AIR 1981 SC 1169 in this regard.

(3.) BEFORE closing the judgment, I may notice the submission, made by Sri Pankaj Misra with some emphasis, that impleadment could not be permitted by the court below after it had verified the compromise. I may only observe that assuming the court below was in error in doing so, the fact remains that the order passed by it promotes justice and I am not inclined to interfere with it, as already observed.