ASHOK KUMAR ROY PRADHANI Vs. KALYANI BHADRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these revision petitions, the Petitioner, has put under challenge the following orders arising out of Title Suit No. 306 of 2006.

(2.) By impugned order dated 26.6.2008 passed in Misc.(j) Case No. 339 of 2007, the application for amendment as proposed therein was allowed while by impugned order dated 26.6.2008 passed in Misc.(j) Case Nos. 100 of 2008 and 101 of 2008 applications for striking out adding of parties made under Order 1, Rule 10(2) of the Code of Code of Civil Procedure were allowed. By impugned order dated 19.7.2008 passed in Misc. (j) Case Nos. 166 of 2008 and 167 of 2008, the review application made under Section 114 of Code were rejected. Since all the impugned orders issued out of Title Suit No. 306 of 2006, both the revision petitions are taken up together for disposal.

(3.) The Respondents herein as Plaintiffs instituted at Title Suit No. 306 of 2006 earlier registered as T.S No. 56 of 2005 for a decree for declaration and permanent injunction against the Petitioner and two others for a declaration that the Gaon Panchayat Office of Moterjhar Panchayat shall continue to remain at Moterjhar Village and Construction of Gaon Panchayat Office of Moterjhar shall not be made at Morakura Village or in any other place other than Moterjhar and also for a decree of permanent injunction against the Petitioners and two others from releasing the fund for earth filing and constructing building at Murakura or any other place. The Petitioner was elected President of the Moterjhar Goan Panchayat from 2001 to 2007 while the Respondents were members of Gaon Panchayat, Anchalic Panchayat and Jilla Panchayat for the term 2001-07. There was a move for shifting the office of the Gaon Panchayat, Moterjhar to Morakura and to resist such shifting the opposite parties instituted the suit as indicated above for a decree for declaration and injunction. While the suit was sub-judice, the opposite parties filed a petition on 1.12.2007 under Order VI, Rule 17 of the Code of Code of Civil Procedure for amendment of the plaint in view of deletion of the Panchayat bodies. The aforesaid petition was registered as Misc. (j) Case No. 339 of 2007. The Petitioner objected to such amendment. However, the learned Munsiff No. 2, Dhubri vide order dated 26.6.2008 allowed such amendment with cost. On 8.5.2008 opposite party No. 1 Smt. Kalayani Bhadra preferred a petition under Order 1, Rule 10(2) of the Code of Code of Civil Procedure praying to strike out her name as Plaintiff. The petition was registered as Misc.(j) Case No. 100 of 2008. Similarly on the same date another application under Order 1, Rule 10(2) of the Code of Code of Civil Procedure was also filed seeking transposition of herself as Defendant on account of her election as President of Moterjhar Gaon Panchayat. The aforesaid petition was registered as Misc.(j) No. 101 of 2008. The learned Munsiff No. 2 took up both the petitions and by a common order dated 26.6.2008 allowed striking of her name as Plaintiff and transposition as Defendant. The Petitioner thereafter filed a review petition being No. 575 on 19.7.2008 for review of the order dated 26.6.2008 passed in Misc. (j) Case No. 339 of 2007 contending inter alia that striking of her name as one of the Plaintiffs and allowing her to be transposed as one of the Defendants on her election as President of the Gaon Panchayat, the suit could not be proceeded with. The learned Munsiff by his order dated 19.7.2008 dismissed the Review Petition No. 575. Being aggrieved by both orders these instant revisions has been filed. This Petitioner also filed another review petition for review of the order dated 26.6.2008 by which amendment was allowed. It was, however, turned down vide order dated 19.7.2008.