VIVEK CHAUDHARY,J. - (1.) Heard Sri Avadhesh Kumar, learned counsel for revisionist and Sri J.P. Mathur, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2/1, 3, 6/1. No one is present for rest of the opposite parties.
(2.) Present civil revision is filed by the revisionist challenging the order dated 25.02.2005 passed by learned Additional District Judge/F.T.C.-I Lakhimpur Kheri. By the impugned order, the learned court below has allowed application no.82-Ga2, filed under Order 1 Rule 10 C.P.C. for deleting the name of defendant no.2 from the array of parties.
(3.) Plaintiff's case is that plaintiff trust is landlord of the shop and has filed the suit for eviction of defendant no.1 and for damagers. Regarding defendant no.2 it is stated in the plaint that he is a suspended Sarvarakar of the trust and is in collusion against the trust with respondent no.1 and for that reason, defendant no.2 is impleaded as a defendant to the suit. Now, by the application no.82-Ga2, it is stated that since no relief is sought against defendant no.2, hence, his name may be deleted from the array of parties. Defendant no.2/revisionist has opposed the said application claiming that there are serious allegations against defendant no.2/revisionist and he has interest in the suit property, hence, he is a necessary and proper party.;