T. Amarnath Goud, J. - (1.)Heard Mr. P.K. Dhar, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. R.G. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. G.K. Nama, learned counsel, Mr. N. Majumder, learned counsel and Mr. R. Saha, learned counsel appearing for their respective respondents.
(2.)Mr. G.K. Nama, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has opposed the present CRP on the ground that it is only a delay tactic played by the petitioner before the court below in filing the said application seeking to implead the parties without any basis and particulars.
(3.)Learned counsel further submits Trial Court was just in rejecting the application of written statement. It is the case of the petitioner that it is a family partition suit where everyone shares and their right and title need to be decided by the Court below. Some other persons who are there as per the record of rights are also in possession of the property and they are also necessary parties. Accordingly, the application seeking impleadment has been filed which the Court below without appreciating the facts and without passing a speaking order entering into the implead application has rejected the same.
;