- (1.) This application is at the instance of the defendant no.1 and is directed against the order No.39 dated March 20, 2006 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Second Court, Howrah in Title Suit No.42 of 2002 thereby allowing an application under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(2.) The short fact is that the petitioner instituted a title suit being Title Suit No.29 of 1992 for declaration of his share and 2 partition. That suit was decreed in the preliminary form. Thereafter, a partition commissioner was appointed and he submitted a report. Thereafter, the final decree was drawn up on May 15, 1996. Sri Tarun Manna was the defendant no.6 in the said Title Suit No.29 of 1992. Subsequently, Sri Tarun Manna filed a suit for partition being Title Suit No.42 of 2002 and in that suit he filed an application for addition of parties and that application was allowed by the impugned order. Being aggrieved, the defendant no.1 of the said suit, namely, Title Suit No.42 of 2002, has preferred this application.
(3.) Now, the point for consideration is whether the learned Trial Judge is justified in allowing the application under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the C.P.C. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the materials on record, I find that admittedly, the petitioner filed the Title Suit No.29 of 1992 for partition with declaration of his share in respect of the property in suit being the premises no.40, Jaynarayan Babu & Ananda Dutta Lane, under P.S. Bantra, District - Howrah. Admittedly, that suit was decreed in the preliminary form. Admittedly, a survey passed commissioner was appointed to effect partition and then the final decree for partition was passed on May 15, 1996. Thus, I find that the earlier suit for partition in respect of the property in suit has reached its finality.;