ROHIT THAKUR Vs. SANTOSH KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dated 22.5.2019, passed by learned Civil Judge, Court No. 2, Una, in CMA No. 1065/2019 in Civil Suit No. 361/2015, whereby application under Order I, rule 10(2) CPC, filed by the petitioner-plaintiff (hereinafter, 'plaintiff') for impleadment of Shri Prem Singh, ex-Pradhan, Gram Panchayat Bhadauri, Tehsil Haroli, District Una, Himachal Pradesh, came to be dismissed, plaintiff has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to set aside impugned order and allow application under Order I, rule 10(2) CPC.

(2.) Precisely, the facts as emerge from the record are that plaintiff filed a suit for recovery on account of damages against the respondent-defendant (hereinafter, 'defendant'), who was Secretary, Gram Panchayat Bhadauri at the relevant time. Plaintiff alleged that the defendant was signatory to the resolution, which being scandalous and defamatory, has lowered his image in the eye of general public and as such, she is liable to pay damages to the plaintiff on account of mental agony and harassment caused to him.

(3.) It is not in dispute that after recoding evidence of both the parties, application under Order I, rule 10(2) CPC on behalf of the plaintiff came to be filed seeking therein impleadment of Prem Singh, ex-Pradhan, Gram Panchayat Bhadauri. Plaintiff averred in the application that person namely Prem Singh, who is ex-Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Bhadauri, is required to be impleaded as defendant No.2 in the civil suit and no prejudice would be caused to the defendant if said person is impleaded as defendant No.2. Plaintiff further averred that the application has been filed in bona fide manner and good faith, however, aforesaid prayer made on behalf of the plaintiff came to be resisted by defendant, who categorically stated that preliminary objection with regard to non-joinder of parties was taken at the first instance at the time of filing of written statement. Defendant claimed that she in her written statement categorically stated that the person namely Prem Singh, who was Pradhan, of Gram Panchayat Bhadauri at the relevant time, is necessary party but despite that plaintiff chose not to file an application at that stage seeking therein impleadment of Prem Singh, as such, present application, which has been filed at such a belated stage, when trial is towards conclusion, is nothing but an attempt to delay the proceedings.