- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties on application filed by respondent No.6 seeking transposition as appellant in the present appeal.
(2.) IT is, inter alia, indicated in the application that before the trial court the applicant was impleaded in the suit as legal representative of deceased Narendrasingh Bhati, who was plaintiff alongwith her brother and sister; while the present appeal has been filed by one of the sisters another appeal being S.B. Civil First Appeal No.349/2013 has been filed by the brother, and the interest of legal representative of respondent No.6 and the appellant are common and same; it would be just, proper and in the interest of justice that the applicant be transposed as appellant in the present appeal and the rights and interest of the other parties to the appeal are not going to be adversely affected in any manner. Though, a reply to the application has been filed by the appellant, inter alia, indicating that without prejudice to her legal right and interest with the respondent No.6, the appellant does not have any objection to the impleadment and her transposition as a co -appellant.
(3.) A reply has been filed by the respondent Nos.1 to 4, inter alia, indicating that the applicant was well aware about the decision in the case and filing of the appeal, but at that time did not chose to contest the appeal and did not file a separate appeal and was sleeping over her right and now cannot be permitted to take benefit of her own wrong to bypass the rigour of law of limitation by way of filing the present application. It is indicated that the rights of the respondents will be adversely affected if the applicant is permitted to be transposed as appellant. The applicant having chosen not to file an appeal separately, cannot be permitted to now file the present application and force the respondent to face one more appellant in the present litigation.;