THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR C.R.P.No.2993 of 2011 O R D E R: The petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.14 of 2006. He filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining the respondents, their agents, servants, associates, subordinates, workmen and henchmen etc., from interfering in any manner with the progress of the construction of the building in the plaint schedule property. It is also his case that he filed another suit O.S.No.93 of 2010 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Sompeta against some third parties alleging that they were interfering with his possession over the suit schedule property. Now, the plaintiff wants to withdraw suit No.14 of 2006 with a liberty to implead the defendants herein as parties in O.S.No.93 of 2010 pending on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Sompeta. The respondents filed a detailed counter. They had taken the stand that they never admitted the title or possession of the plaintiff over the plaint schedule property and, according to them, it is classified as Gorja Poramboke and belongs to the Government. It is also their case that the plaintiff is showing wrong boundaries in the plaint schedule property and is trying to encroach the Government land covered by Survey No.103/5B. The lower Court, after referring to the relevant provisions particularly Order 23 Rule 1(3) of C.P.C. and holding that the plaintiff failed to establish that the suit may be likely to be dismissed in view of the formal defects in the suit, dismissed the petition. As rightly observed by the lower Court, a plaintiff may be permitted to withdraw a suit while granting liberty to institute a fresh suit arises only in case where the suit filed by the plaintiff is likely to be dismissed for formal defects in the suit. That is not the case of the petitioner-plaintiff herein. Therefore, the lower Court is perfectly justified in dismissing the petition filed by the petitioner. If the petitioner wants to withdraw his own suit, he can withdraw the suit but he cannot be granted permission to implead the respondents herein ie., the defendants in the suit in O.S.No.14 of 2006 as defendants in O.S.No.93 of 2010. There are no merits in the revision. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed at the stage of admission. ____________________ B.CHANDRA KUMAR,J Dt. 5th August, 2011 PNV