RAM NAUMI SINGH Vs. MRITUNJAYA KUMAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellants.

(2.) THE instant writ application has been preferred against the order dated 29th March 2010 passed by the Subordinate Judge-1, Hazaribagh, in Title Suit No. 51 of 2008, whereby an amendment moved at the behest of the plaintiff has been allowed. THE petitioner has been added as defendant no. 3 in the said suit and also certain amendment in paragraph nos. 5, and in paragraph no. 7, in paragraph 12(a), 17(1) and in paragraph nos. 4, 11 and 14 of the plaint is proposed, since body of the plaint is required to be amended because this defendant has also been arrayed at a subsequent stage. THE Court below has allowed the amendment. THE present petitioner is newly added defendant. Petitioner states that since the suit is for specific performance of contract, therefore, defendant no. 3 is stranger and cannot be arrayed as party.

(3.) HOWEVER, at present, I am not concerned with the other persons, who have interest in the suit property. The present writ petition is specifically against the order allowing petitioner to be added as defendant no. 3 as a party, I am not inclined to interfere in the impugned order in exercise of writ jurisdiction. The objections, which have been raised here can very well be raised by the petitioner in the suit, before the Court below at the appropriate time. The writ petition lacks merit and, accordingly, dismissed. The petitioner will be at liberty to file written statement and the suit shall proceed after written statement is preferred by the newly added defendant no. 3 , in case, he desires to do so within prescribed limitation under the Code of Civil Procedure. The writ petition stands dismissed.