- (1.) This revisional application is directed against the orders dated March 29, 2016 and May 04, 2016 passed by the learned Judge, 3rd Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta in Title Suit No. 314 of 1995. The said Title Suit No. 314 of 1995 is a partition suit. Out of the properties which are claimed to be partitioned, two properties are situated in Kolkata at premises no. 36, Sir Hari Ram Goenka Street, Kolkata, Premises no. 45, Shibthakur Lane and the remaining properties are situated at Etawah, in the State of Uttar Pradesh.
(2.) The petitioner in this revisional application claims herself to be the daughter of Ratan Chand Sarawagi, since deceased, who had share in the properties sought to be partitioned. Some of the heirs and legal representatives of the said Ratan Chand Sarawagi, since deceased, are already parties to the partition suit. The grievance of the petitioner in this application is that admittedly she is one of the daughters of Ratan Chand Sarawagi, since deceased, but by the impugned order, the learned Court below has rejected the application filed by her for impleadment of herself and her two sons in the partition suit as the heirs of Ratan Chand Sarawagi, since deceased.
(3.) Mr. Verma learned advocate for the opposite party nos. 1, 2 and 3, the plaintiffs in the partition suit submitted that there is no dispute that the petitioner in the present revisional application is the daughter of the said Ratan Chand Sarawagi, since deceased and, as such, she is entitled to be impleaded in the suit. Mr. Arefin, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Verma, learned advocate appearing for the opposite party nos. 1, 2 and 3 as well as Mr. Banerjee, representing the opposite party nos. 4 to 6 submitted that the learned Court below passed the order dated March 29, 2016 without considering various documents disclosed by the respective parties. It appears that the petitioner in this revisional application filed an application before the learned Court below for recalling of the order dated March 29, 2016 and by the second impugned order dated May 04, 2016, the learned Court below rejected the said application only on the ground that the order dated March 29, 2016 was passed on merit.;