Bholanath vs Smt. Kamlesh Gupta on 20 February, 2018
Further, it is imperative on the part of plaintiff that all the
parties should be impleaded and relief sought should be
detailed out so that controversy can be decided conclusively
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
3 W.P.No. 4769/2017
(Bholanath Vs. Smt. Kamlesh Gupta & Ors.)
and in a meaningful manner. Inclusion of all the parties in a
case like present one would give an opportunity to all the
parties to reach to a settlement also if in future good sense
prevails over the parties or situation arises so. Therefore, trial
Court erred in rejecting the application of plaintiff to include the
newly added parties as defendants. However, looking to the
fact that plaintiff moved the application at a belated stage, a
cost of Rs. 2,500/- (Rs. Two Thousand Five Hundred only) is
imposed upon him which should be payable by him on the next
date of hearing before the trial Court to
respondents/defendants in equal share. Resultantly, the
impugned order passed by the trial Court dated 13/2/2017 is
hereby set aside and application preferred by the
petitioner/plaintiff under Order I Rule 10 CPC stands allowed.
Petitioner/plaintiff is at liberty to cause necessary amendment
in the cause title of suit before the trial Court, in accordance
with law. Parties to appear before the trial Court on 7 th March,
2018 to take guidance from the trial Court in this regard.