http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: NABHIRAJ & ORS.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: JAYEVATIBAI @ SHANTHA BAI & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       15/04/1996

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. G.B. PATTANAIK (J)

CITATION:  1996 SCC  (4) 592        JT 1996 (6)    78  1996 SCALE  (4)321

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Leave granted.      We have  heard learned counsel on both sides. The first respondent instituted  a suit  dated October  30, 1981 for a declaration to  the effect that she is the absolute owner of the suit land admeasuring 6 acres and 25 gunthas situated at Raichur.  Subsequently,   the   appellants   got   impleaded themselves as  the respondents  under order 1, Rule 10, CPC. We are  as informed  that in spite of repeated adjournments, they did,  not file written statement and by an order of the Court they  forfeited their right . However, in paragraph 12 of  the  voluntarily  filed  written  statement,  they  have specifically stated   that   they  "reserve their  rights to recover  their   share  of   compensation  amount  illegally received the  first respondent  [appellant  from  the  Court acquiring the  land in  Survey  No.686".  They  also  sought dismissal of  the suit.  The contention  now  sought  to  be raised is  that the  order of  the Court directing the first respondent  to  have  the  suit  dismissed  as  against  the appellants, would  disentitle them  from claiming any relief in the  matter. We  find no force in the contention. In this case, it is not the case of first respondent that the sought permission under  Order 23,  Rule 1,  CPC to  have the  suit dismissed with  liberty to  file fresh  suit. In  the plaint itself, the  respondent did  not seek any relief against the appellants. The appellants got themselves impleaded as party defendants during  the pendency  of the suit. In view of the specific stand  taken by  the appellants  that they reserved their right to take appropriate proceedings in the form open to them,  the first  respondent is  not prepared  to proceed against  the   appellants  in   this   suit.   Under   these circumstances,  the   permission  granted   by   the   Court dismissing the  suit as  against the  appellants  cannot  be stated to have been vitiated by any error of law.      The appeal  is accordingly dismissed. It is stated that

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

the suit  is pending  for years. The trial Court is directed to dispose  of the  suit expeditiously. If anybody has filed or files  any application for impleadment, it is directed to be dismissed. No costs.