- (1.) TODAY, when the C.M.P.No.1223 of 1999 was heard, it came to be known that this is a petition filed under O.1, Rule 10(2) for impleading the second and third respondents therein, as parties to the suit proceedings in O.S.No.73 of 1992. This petition had been filed on the part of respondents 1 and 2 herein as a proposed respondents in I.A.No.66 of 1999 in the said suit.
(2.) SINCE the very C.R.P. itself had been filed on the question of testifying the validity of the Order passed by the lower court that is, the Court of Additional District Munsif, Valliyoor, under the impression that the suit need not be kept in wait for the simple reason, that the C.R.P. is pending before this Court, it is decided to take the main C.R.P. itself for decision. Today, neither the respondents nor their counsel appeared before this Court to offer any representation on their behalf. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the petitioner is present and argued the case. In these circumstances, this Court is left with no option but to decide the above C.R.P. and the C.M.P., based on the materials made available on record and upon hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner. On perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the petition, it comes to be known that respondent Nos.2 and 3 are the proposed parties before the lower court in the I.A., that the main contention of the proposed parties is that the plaintiffs in the suit have filed a suit showing the properties that are lawfully belonging to the proposed respondents 2 and 3 before the lower court in the I.A. as their own and hence they have come forward to file the impleading petition under O.1, Rule 10(2), and the court below also affording full opportunity to both the parties to be heard and marking certain documents, has ultimately arrived at the conclusion to allow the petition. It is only aggrieved against the said order dated 11.11.1998, the petitioner herein and the first respondent in the application before the lower court, has come forward to file the very C.R.P. Though, the rights of parties has to be decided only in the suit with due opportunity to both the parties to be heard, still, just for the simple reason that the first and second respondents herein have been ordered to be impleaded as necessary parties to the suit proceedings as it had been done by the Court of Additional District Munsif, Valliyoor in the case in hand, it does not mean that automatically respondents Nos.2 and 3 will be granted with the relief that they seek for in the suit. Unless they had the right to get any share or right to be declared, they cannot accept any fraction of the suit property and hence the whole affair has to be decided by the trial court with due opportunities afforded to both the parties to be heard and ultimate decision has to be arrived at based on the materials placed on record and upon hearing the parties fully. Hence, when establishing charges before the trial court, the trial court, in spite of the second and third respondents having been impleaded as parties, cannot order anything in their favour and hence the fear that is being entertained on the part of the petitioner herein that their rights will be jeopardised by impleading the first and second respondents herein has no basis at all. Hence, the Court of Additional District Munsif has, at this stage, especially that the second and third respondents have come forward to allege with their properties which are lawfully belonging to them have been shown as the suit properties by the petitioner herein and as the plaintiff before the lower court, necessarily he has to allow the petition for impleadment of the second and third respondents and rightly has been done by him. Therefore, this is not the stage wherein, without refusing to accept them as parties, the rights in the suit property could be decided. Instead, the second and third respondents are given a fair opportunity to contest the suit which in all probabilities has to be done by the court and the same has been properly done in allowing the petition filed by the first and second respondents herein under O.1, Rule 10(2) for impleading them as proper parties to suit.
(3.) FOR all the above discussions held, this Court does not deem it proper to interfere with the well considered and well merited order passed by the Court of the Additional District Munsif, Valliyoor dated 11.11.1998. In result, the above civil revision petition necessarily fails and the same is dismissed. Consequently, C.M.P.No.1223 of 1999 is also dismissed.;