KASILANKA VEERASWAMY NAIDU Vs. PINNAM REDDY NAGA RAVENDRABABU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Civil Revision Petition is filed aggrieved by the order dtd. 7/2/2024 in I.A.No.313 of 2021 in O.S.No.36 of 2019 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Razole.

(2.) The petitioner herein is the defendant in the said suit, which is filed for recovery of an amount of Rs.24,34,666.00. In the suit, the petitioner filed a written statement, inter alia, stating that the 1st respondent-plaintiff had no capacity to lend such a huge amount and that one Mr.Mutyala Srinivasa Rao is behind the litigation and the suit is filed at his behest with an intention to grab the property of the petitioner. A plea was also taken that the suit promissory note is a forged and fabricated document. Seeking to implead the said Srinivasa Rao as a party to the suit proceedings I.A.No.313 of 2021 is filed under Order I Rule 10 read with Order VI Rule 17 of CPC and Sec. 151 of CPC. The said application was opposed by the respondent / plaintiff.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the learned trial Court erred in dismissing the I.A. without considering the matter in its proper perspective. He submits that in a light of the specific defence taken in the written statement with reference to Mr. Mutyala Srinivasa Rao, proposed party, the Trial Court ought to have allowed the application. He submits that unless the proposed party is impleaded as defendant, the petitioner herein would not be in a position to prove the defence taken in the written statement. He also contends that no prejudice would be caused, if the proposed respondent is added as defendant to the suit proceedings.