BABULAL Vs. PREM KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision is arising out of the order dated 08/1/2015 passed by the trial Court whereby the trial Court has rejected the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC filed by the petitioners as well as Vishnu Prasad Pathak.

(2.) It reveals from the record that on 16/3/2017, this Court has allowed the present civil revision and dismissed the suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff. Against the order dated 16/3/2017, a review petition was preferred by the respondent which was allowed by this Court and the civil revision was restored to its original number only on the ground of non-implementation of Vishnu Prasad Pathak. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed IA No.1487/2018 for impleading Vishnu Prasad Pathak as petitioner No.3 in the present revision.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that at the time of filing of present civil revision, the certified copy issued by the trial Court could not reflect the name of Vishnu Prasad Pathak in the array of cause-title, therefore, he could not implead Vishnu Prasad Pathak as party in this revision as the petitioner. Vishnu Prasad Pathak as well as Dwarika Prasad Pathak both are at same footing. Hence, learned counsel for the petitioners prayed that he may be permitted to implead Vishnu Prasad Pathak as petitioner No.3 in the present civil revision. The application is supported by an affidavit.