JUDGMENT 1. - Indisputably, the petitioner was added as party in the sit on 19.4.1996, under the provisions contained in 0. 22 R. 10 CPC and the plaintiff non-petitioners, in compliance of the order of the trial Court filed amended title of the plaint incorporating the name of the defendant-petitioner. Thereafter the defendant-petitioner moved an application seeking permission to file written statement. The learned trial court dismissed the application vide order dated 22.5.1996. Against this order that the present action for filing the revision has been resorted to by the defendant-petitioner. 2. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the impugned order and scanning thee legal provisions I am of the view that the person - substituted during the pendency of the suit u /O. 22 R. 10 CPC has a right to continue the suit from the date he filed the application, but if written statement was already filed and witnesses were cross-examined prior to filing of the application, the person so substituted cannot claim the right to file written statement or to cross-examine the witnesses. Rule 10(1) of 0. 22 provides that "in other cases of an assignment creation or devolution of any interest during the pendency of suit, the suit may, be leave of the Court, be continued by or against thee person to or upon whom such interest has come or devolved." (Underlining is mine)This rule is based on the principle that the trial of a suit cannot be arrested merely by reason of a devolution of the interest of a party in the subject matter of the suit; that the person acquiring the interest may continue the suit with the leave of the Court. 3. The arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner are based on misinterpretation of word "continued" used in R. 10(1) of 0. 22 and I am unable to persuade myself with the interpretation so canvassed. I see no jurisdictional error in the order impugned and no failure of justice would be occasioned if it is allowed to stand. 4. In the result the revision fails and is hereby dismissed. Costs easy.Revision dismissed. *******