AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sanjay Kumar, CJ
Heard Mr. T. Rajendra, learned counsel for the applicant; and Ms. Sandhyarani, learned counsel, appearing for the revision petitioner, respondent No. 1 in the miscellaneous case.
By way of this miscellaneous case, the applicant seeks to come on record as respondent No. 5 in the CRP. Affidavit-in-opposition is filed by the petitioner in the CRP, but it is an admitted fact that the applicant claims title under defendant No. 4 in the suit, at whose behest the suit was restored and it is the said order that is subjected to challenge in this civil revision petition. As the applicant is the successor-in-interest of defendant No. 4, who is the source of this present litigation, the applicant has shown sufficient interest in the matter to be given an opportunity of being heard.
MC(CRP(CRP.Art.227) No. 16 of 2016 is accordingly ordered and the applicant is brought on record as respondent No. 5 in the CRP.
Registry is directed to carry out necessary corrections in the cause-title of the main case.