RASHID ALI Vs. ALI HASAN & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Powers of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution of India are invoked to assail the interlocutory order dated 19/11/2010 in C.S.26A/2010, passed by First Civil Judge, ClassII, Gwalior (M.P.) (M.P.), whereby an application under Order I Rule 10 of C.P.C., preferred by the defendant No.3 for being transposed as plaintiff, has been rejected.

(2.) Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.

(3.) Factual background is that the suit was filed on 23/1/2008 for declaration of ownership and permanent injunction. In the said civil suit there was no mention of the suit property having been obtained by way of Hibanama. The lower court further noticed that the WS filed by the defendant No.3 also had not mentioned of the said Hibanama. The court further declined to accept the contention of the defendant No.3 in his application under Order 1 Rule 10 of C.P.C. that the plaintiff is delaying the suit by recording finding that the plaintiff's evidence is already over and the suit was presently at the stage of cross-examination to be conducted by the defendant. After noticing all these factual details, the trial court has dismissed the application and declined transposition of the defendant No.3 as plaintiff.