SHANTI MANI BADHAI Vs. LAKSHMAN DHANIRAM BADHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is plaintiffs' appeal who succeeded in Civil Suit no. 18-A/89 before the Civil Judge Class-II, Ajaygarh on 22. 7. 1992 but lost in Civil appeal no. 48-A/1992 on 3. 2. 1993 by Additional Judge to the Court of district Judge, Panna.

(2.) THIS appeal was filed on 17. 3. 1993 and admitted for final hearing on 30. 9. 1993, on the following substantial questions of law:

(3.) THE appellants have filed an application under Order 1 rule 10 c. P. C. (I. A. No. 182/2008) on 3. 1. 2008 praying for impleadment of Smt. Bitti, Mulli and Sunti as respondents in the present appeal. This application was filed on the ground that present appeal was preferred by plaintiffs Smt. Shanti and Kewaldeen, but other co-plaintiffs Smt. Bitti and Smt. Mulli, and defendant Sunti had not chosen to prefer an appeal, so they are required to be impleaded as respondents. Similarly, the State of M. P. was required to be impleaded as respondent, but due to bona fide mistake, it could not be impleaded as respondent. On these grounds, it was prayed that these four be permitted to be impleaded as respondents. In the application, it is stated that their non impleadment was due to bona fide mistake and there was no mala fide on the part of appellants for not impleading them. On 23. 10. 2007, at the time of hearing, this fact was pointed out and immediately thereafter this application was filed. It was prayed that aforesaid three ladies and State of M. P. be permitted to be impleaded as respondents 8 to 11 in the appeal, in the interest of justice.