SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- R.C. Lahoti, C.J. and G.P. Mathur, J.

Civil Appeals Nos. 1695-96 of 2005, Arising out of SLPs (C) Nos. 22892-93 of 2003. D/d. 11.3.2005.

Subodh Kumar Gupta and others - Appellants

Versus

Alpana Gupta and others - Respondents

ORDER

R.C. Lahoti, C.J. - Leave granted.

2. The parties in the suit are related with each other. One Subodh Kumar Gupta is already a party to the suit. The plaintiffs (respondents herein) at one stage moved an application proposing to bring on record as defendants his wife, three daughters and the HUF of Subodh Kumar Gupta. At a later stage the application was not pressed and hence was dismissed. Subsequently, Subodh Kumar Gupta himself moved an application for impleadment of his wife, daughters and the HUF as defendants. This prayer was allowed by the trial court. In a petition preferred by the plaintiffs under Article 227 of the Constitution, the High Court interfered with the order of the trial court and set aside the order of impleadment.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are satisfied that the order passed by the High Court cannot be sustained. The trial court had exercised its discretion and assigned reasons for permitting impleadment. In exercise of limited jurisdiction conferred by Article 227, the High Court should not have interfered with the discretion exercised by the trial court. Even otherwise, having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are satisfied that the impleadment of wife, daughters and HUF of Subodh Kumar Gupta is justified on the facts and in the circumstances of the case.

4. The appeals are allowed. The impugned order of the High Court is set aside. Instead the order dated 2-1-2001 passed by the trial court i.e. the District Judge, Rajnandgaon is restored. It is made clear that such impleadment is without prejudice to the pleas open to the plaintiff-respondents and in the event of any written statement being filed by the newly added defendants, the plaintiffs would be at liberty to raise all such pleas as may be available for them to be raised either on facts or on law in response to the pleas raised by the newly added parties in their written statement.

5. No order as to the costs.

Appeal allowed.