1. NADEEM AZHAR SIDDIQI, J.---By this application the applicant/intervener IDBP has prayed for joining as defendant No,18 in the above proceedings.
2. ' Learned counsel for the intervener submits that the defendant No,1 has availed financial facilities from the intervener and despite requests to repay the dues of intervener the said defendant has committed default. He further submits that the defendant No,1 executed a Letter of Continuity regarding mortgage pertaining to its immovable property wherein, inter alia, the mortgage already created in favour of the intervener was acknowledged as continuing security. He then submits that to secure the interest of the applicant it is necessary for the applicant to become party to the proceedings to protect its interest.
3. ' Learned counsel for the plaintiff has opposed the said application and submits that the present suit is in between the Banking Company and its customer and the applicant has no nexus with the dispute in the suit. He further submits that the applicant in collusion with the defendant No,1 wants to become a party to the proceedings to delay and protract the proceedings. He then refers to section 73 of C.P.C. And submits that proper stage of the applicant for joining the proceedings is after the decree and before the sale of mortgage properties.
4. Learned counsel for the defendants Nos.13 to 17 has supported the said application and has referred to Order XXXIX of C.P.C. And submits that in a suit relating to mortgages of immovable property all persons having an interest either in the mortgage security or in the right of redemption shall be joined as party to any suit relating to the mortgages.
5. ' In rebuttal, learned counsel for the applicant/intervener has referred to order dated 18-5-2006 by which the defendants Nos.13 to 17 were made parties to the proceedings.
6. There appears to be some force in the contentions of the learned counsel for plaintiff and the other counsel. Detailed hearing and arguments are required to appreciate the contentions of the learned counsel. However, keeping in view the order dated 18-5-2006 by which the parties having similar nature of claim have been joined as party to the proceedings no purpose will be served in hearing the controversy in detail, hence this application is allowed as prayed. Amended title to be filed within 15 days. Since the intervener is already on notice no further notice is required in the matter.