NITI BHATTACHARJEE W/O LATE ANANDMOY BHATTACHARJEE vs STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, AT, PO, PS & DISTRICT-DEOGHAR

The petitioners are aggrieved of order dated 21.03.2016 passed in Title Suit No.59 of 2009 by which their application under Order 1 Rule 3-A CPC

for separation of trial has been declined.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in the suit as many as 465 persons have been arrayed as defendants. Â

Order 1 Rule 2 CPC provides that where it appears to the court that any joinder of plaintiffs may embarrass or delay the trial of the suit, the court

may put the plaintiffs to their election or order separate trials or make such other order as may be expedient. This rule does not refer to the

defendants. Order 1 Rule 3-A CPC provides that where it appears to the court that any joinder of defendants may embarrass or delay the trial of

the suit, the court may order separate trials or make such other order as may be expedient in the interests of justice. One of the issues settled in the

suit is whether the suit is liable to be dismissed for non-joinder of parties. The petitioners are purchasers and the subsequent purchasers have also

been made defendants in the suit. The subject matter in the suit is immovable properties.

In the above facts, finding no infirmity in the impugned order dated 21.03.2016, the writ petition is dismissed.