AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Registry to waive office objections and register the matter.
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, petition is disposed of finally.
This petition challenges an order dated 14.08.2025 dismissing the application filed by the Petitioner at Exhibit D-110 in Regular Civil Suit No.30/2014 pending before the Civil Judge Junior Division at Canacona. By the impugned order, the Trial Court has rejected the application filed by the Petitioner seeking impleadment as a Defendant in the suit. The only reason cited by the Trial Court for rejection of the application was that, on an earlier application filed by Defendant Nos. 9(a) to 9(e) and 12(a) for impleading this very Petitioner as a Defendant in the suit, the Trial Court had rejected that application by order dated 09.02.2023. The Trial Court has refrained from going into the case set up by the Petitioner in his application at Exhibit D-110.
On perusing the previous order passed by the Trial Court, which is dated 09.02.2023, filed on application at Exhibit D-79, it becomes evident that that order was passed on an application filed by Defendant Nos. 9(a) to 9(e) and 12(a). That order cannot bind the present petition. On this count alone, the impugned order must be quashed and set aside.
The application at Exhibit D-110 filed by the Petitioner claims that the Petitioner is the son of Shamba Naik, who he claims is one of the co-owners of the suit property. The application further pleads that the name of the Petitioner himself is contained in the survey record in the Index of Land in Form III maintained under the Land Revenue Code. This is the claim of the Petitioner whose application would have to be considered on its own merits, and considering the jurisdiction of the Civil Court under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC. The Trial Court has not entered into the merits of the application while passing the impugned order, nor has it considered the claim of the Applicant/Petitioner herein and whether he has made out a case for impleadment under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC.
Since the impugned order dated 14.08.2025 is quashed and set aside, the Trial Court is directed to hear the application at Exhibit D-110 on its own merits and, after considering its powers under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, shall decide the application without being influenced by the order it has passed earlier on 09.02.2023, passed on Exhibit D-79.
Rule is made absolute in the above terms.
The application may be decided either on 06.12.2025 or any other date convenient to the Trial Court.