RAMPRATAP Vs. VIJAY KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition has been filed against the order of the learned Additional District Judge No. 2, Sri Ganganagar dated May 24, 1989 by which he has dismissed the application of the petitioners moved under Order 1 Rule 10, C. P. C. The facts of the case giving rise to this revision petition may be summarised thus.

(2.) IN the year 1978, the plaintiff Vijay Kumar filed a suit for rent & ejectment against his tenant M/s. Kriparam Ganeshilal (non-petitioner No. 2 ). On the death of the partner Lachhmandas, the firm was dissolved and a new firm was constituted under the name and style on September 2, 1982. IN the old and new firm, only one partner Rambhuj was common. The proceedings in the suit continued. On April 3, 1989, the petitioners moved an application for being impleaded in the suit as defendants on the ground that they are also partners in the existing firm and the rent is being paid by the new firm. After hearing the parties, the learned trial court dismissed the application by its order under revision.

(3.) UNDER these facts & circumstances, it cannot be said that the learned Additional District Judge No. 2, Sri Ganganagar has acted with material irregularity or illegality in rejecting" the application of the petitioners moved under Order 1 Rule 10, C. P. C.