PUSPENDU BIKASH SAHU Vs. DILIP KUMAR BASAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge is to the Order No.17 dated June 16, 2011 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 9 th Court, Alipore in Title Suit No.3546 of 2010 thereby granting leave to the plaintiffs to implead the Receiver as defendant in the suit consequently amendment sought for was also allowed. Being aggrieved, the defendants have preferred this application.

(2.) The plaintiffs/opposite parties herein instituted a suit being Title Suit No.3546 of 2010 for a decree for partition and other reliefs in respect of the suit properties as described in the schedule to the plaint.

(3.) The petitioners entered an appearance and thereafter, they filed an application for dismissal of the said suit on the ground of its maintainability that another suit for partition and accounts in respect of the several properties including the suit properties of this suit being Title Suit No.15 of 2007 had already been field by the plaintiff No.2/opposite party No.2 herein. It is also contended by the defendants that one Sri Pradip Pal, an advocate was appointed as Receiver in respect of the 'A' schedule property described in the schedule to the plaint and such 'A' schedule property contains the suit properties of the instant suit. Since a Receiver had been appointed in respect of the suit properties, the present plaintiffs have no right to institute another suit for partition over the same property along with other properties. Thereafter, the plaintiffs filed two applications one for impleading the learned Receiver as a proforma defendant and another application for amendment of the plaint in view of such facts. By the impugned order, both the applications have been allowed. Being aggrieved, this application has been preferred against the impugned order by the defendants.