SMT. GEETA SHARMA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE trial Court by its order dated 14.9.1995 allowed the application of the non -petitioner No. 2 for impleading him as defendant in the suit in accordance with the provisions of O.I, R. 10 C. P; C.

(2.) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, it appears that the petitioner/plaintiff filed a civil suit No. 19 -A/94 in the Court of Civil Judge Class, 1 Shivpuri for declaration that constructions and boundary walls of the plaintiff are situate within plots No. 1126 and 1127/2 and do not fall in plots No. 1093 and 1099. During the proceedings of the suit, before framing of the issues, non -petitioner No. 2 as an intervener moved an application under Order 1 Rule 10 C.P.C. for impleading him as defendant on the ground that he has title and possession over plot No. 1098 and any decree passed in the suit shall adversely affect his claim for title and possession over plot No. 1098 situate adjacent to plot No. 1126 and 1127.

(3.) WITH this observation, the trial Court allowed the application under Order 1 Rule 10 C.P.C. and directed that non -petitioner No. 2 be impleaded as defendant in the suit, and consequential amendments in the plaint be made.