ASHOK GEHANI Vs. SUSHIL KUMAR DHANWANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision u/s 115 of CPC is filed against the order dated 22.7.2006 passed by the District Judge, Bhopal in MJC No. 126/06 by which application of applicants u/s. 24 of CPC for transferring the suits pending in different Courts in any one Court was rejected.

(2.) THE case of the applicant is that he has purchased a plot No. 78 (new No. 28) situated at Malviya Nagar, Bhopal (M.P.) alongwith structure except shops No. 2 and 5 by registered sale deed dated 7.5.2004. The building is more than 40 years old and is in dilapidated condition. The Municipal Corporation, Bhopal respondent No. 7 issued notice on 5.8.2004 u/s. 310 (1) of the Municipal Corporation Act to each of the tenants of the building to leave the premises or to carry out the repair of the same with the permission of the Corporation. Respondents No. 2 and 4 filed separate suit as owners of two shops and respondent No. 1 and respondent No. 3 as tenant for permanent injunction restraining the Corporation to take any action in view of the notice dated 5.8.2004 and further to restrain the Corporation from causing any damage to the disputed property. The applicant, therefore, filed an application before the trial Court under Order 1 Rule 10, CPC for impleading him as defendant but the same was rejected and it was directed that if the applicants have any vested right in the suit property they can file a separate suit. Therefore, applicants filed separate suit for declaration that parties are bound to comply with the notice issued by the Corporation and for injunction restraining respondent from causing any obstruction in action of the Municipal Corporation before Additional District Judge which is registered as Civil Suit No. l-A/06 whereas other two suits are pending in the Court of Civil Judges.

(3.) SHRI Ramesh Shrivastava, counsel for respondent No. 5 has argued that this revision is not maintainable.