PARSURAM MAHABHOI Vs. JANAKI DEI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRAYER for transposing some of the co -plaintiffs as pro forma defendants having been refused, the present revision application has been filed.

(2.) THE petitioners are plaintiff Nos. 1, 2, 5 and 7 in Title Suit No. 185 of 1980 of the Court of Additional Subordinate Judge, Cuttack, The suit is one for specific performance of contract allegedly entered into by the present petitioners and pro forma opposite party Nos. 5, 6 and 7 with defendant No. 1 opposite party No, 1. During the pendency of the suit, an application was filed for transposition of the aforesaition forma opposite parties who were plaintiff Nos. 3, 4 and 6 in the suit. The application was resisted by the defendants on , the ground that on 15 -4 -1985 the suit had already been dismissed under Order 9, Rule 10, Code of Civil Procedure (in short 'CPC')by operation of law for man -attendance of concerned plaintiffs on 15 -4 -85. Several other ground; on the merit of the suit were also indicated. After hearing the parties the application for transposition was rejected on the ground that there was no material to show that plaintiff Nos. 3, 4 and 6 were not interested and/or they had been gained over by the defendants, ft is relevant to mention here that the learned. Subordinate Judge proceeded on the basis that the application was filed on the ground that plaintiff Nos 3, 4 and 6 were not interested in the proceeding and. had been gained over by the defendants. He came to -conclude that if the petition is allowed, the nature of the case would take a different mode. By these observations, the petition was rejected,