THREETY IRANI Vs. SUSHMA RATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application has arisen out of the order no. 79 dated 30. 08. 2007 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Second Court at Alipore in T. S. No. 159 of 2003 whereby she has rejected the application for striking out the name of the defendant/petitioner herein from the plaint.

(2.) THE plaintiff/opposite party no. 1 filed the said title suit for declaration and permanent injunction. In that suit, the original defendant no. 1 appeared and he died subsequently. Then the petitioner before me was substituted for the original defendant no. 1. According to her stand, after death of her husband, she was suffering from financial crisis and so under compelling circumstances she had sold her flat bearing no. 4/c of the premises No. 21/b, Belvedere Road, Kolkata. After such sale of the flat, she lost interest in the suit property. So she has prayed for striking out her name from the cause title. Her application was rejected by the learned Civil Judge (Junior division) by the impugned order. Being aggrieved by the said order, she has preferred this application.

(3.) UPON hearing the learned Advocate of both the sides and on perusal of the record, I find that the learned Advocate for the petitioner has contended that after assignment of her interest in the suit property the petitioner is not at all a necessary party or proper party to solve the dispute between the parties, so, her name should be struck out from the cause title of the plaint. The learned Advocate for the opposite party has raised rival contention against such submission and he has supported the order impugned. He has also contended that the so-called deed of sale is not properly stamped and there is no proof of registration of the same. So the learned Trial Court was right in not accepting the prayer of the defendant no. 1/petitioner herein.