VINITA Vs. YASHODHARA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Heard finally with consent of learned counsel for the parties. Challenge is to the order passed by the trial Court refusing permission to the petitioner to file written statement along with counter-claim.

(2.) The respondent No. 1 is the original plaintiff who had initially filed suit for specific performance and permanent injunction against respondent No. 2. In said proceedings, the present petitioner filed an application vide Exhibit-18 for intervening in the said proceedings. By order dated 23-1-2013, the trial Court allowed said application and directed addition of present petitioner as defendant No. 2.

(3.) The petitioner thereafter moved an application for temporary injunction which ultimately came to be rejected on 6-1-2014. The respondent No. 1 in the meanwhile had also sought permission to amend the plaint and said application was allowed on 6-1-2014. On being supplied copy of the amended plaint, the petitioner on 17-2-2014 filed application for permission to file written statement on record along with counter-claim.