ALOK SHARMA,J. - (1.) Heard counsel for the petitioner-plaintiff (for short, 'the plaintiff') and perused the impugned order dated 23.8.2017 passed by District Judge, Jhunjhunu in Civil Suit No. 42/2015, whereby the plaintiff's application under Order 32 Rule 15 CPC has been dismissed by the trial court.
(2.) Counsel for the plaintiff submitted that the said order is vitiated for non application of mind and overlooks the specific case on behalf of plaintiff for his being represented by next friend / guardian. It was submitted that the plaintiff is about 76 years old with failing health, suffering inter-alia from hypertension, diabetes, heart disease and as certified by the Doctor, unable to talk properly and is intermittently loosing his memory. Under these circumstances, counsel submitted the trial court ought to have allowed the application and allowed the plaintiff to be represented by next friend / guardian.
(3.) Heard. Considered. Admittedly the plaintiff is only 76 years old which by itself is quite irrelevant to the application under Order 32 Rule 15 CPC. He has filed the suit in 2015 for cancellation of the sale deed executed by defendant no.1 in favour of defendant no.2 through a power of attorney. At the relevant time he was obviously of sound mind and were if not so, the maintainability of the suit itself would be open to question.;