ASHA DEVI Vs. RAM KRISHAN AGRAWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TILE instant civil revision application under Sec. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against the order of the Subordinate Judge. Motihari, in F.D. (P.S.) 235/1 of 1975/84, whereby the petition of the opposite party under Order I, Rule 10 of the Code was allowed and Shyam Sunder Agarwal Duroshotum Agarwal and Om Prakash Agarwal were added as defendants. Although by the said order the petition filed on behalf of defendant Ram Krishna Agarwal under Order XXXIX, Rule 1 of the Code was also disposed of but the present petition has been confined against that part of the order only whereby the opposite party were added as defendants.

(2.) THE opposite party newly added defendants are the purchasers of certain lands, (detailed in Schedule f of the petition under Order I, Rule 10, C.P.C.) through different sale -deeds from Bhagwan Das and some other defendants, who were party to the suit from the very beginning. According to them, since by virtue of the sale -deeds from the co -shares of the parties, they have stepped into the shoes of such vendees, therefore, they are entitled to be added as defendants in order to defend their claim with regard to the lands covered by the sale -deeds.

(3.) IT appears, no objection was raised by the plaintiffs or the defendants about the addition of parties i.e. Shyam Sunder Agarwal and others but an objection was raised on behalf of Nirmala Devi, Shanti Devi and Sheoji Prasad (petitioners of this case). According to them, the petition filed under Order I. Rule 10 of the Code was not at all maintainable as no final decree was pending on the day of filing of such application. Therefore, no order for addition of party can be recorded in a suit or proceeding which was already disposed of. In any view of the matter, since Shyam Sunder Agarwal and others were not party to the suit, they cannot challenge the validity of the preliminary decree or final decree even it was found against their interest.