JUDGMENT : P.K. Misra, J. - Though it was directed that the matter shall be listed along with Civil Review No. 111 of 1997, learned counsel for all the parties including the counsel for the present petitioner state that the Civil Review is not necessary to be taken along with this matter as the said Civil Review relates to the question of appointment of a receiver whereas the present Civil Revision relates to the question of transposition of defendant No. 12 as a plaintiff. 2. On the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the Civil Revision is taken up for hearing and final disposal. 3. In a pending suit for partition, defendant No. 1 filed a petition to trampose defendant No. 12 as a plaintiff. The said petition having been rejected, the present Civil Revision has been filed by defendant No. 1. It cannot be said that the order of the trial Court is per se illegal or without jurisdiction. As a matter of fact, the petition for transposition should have been filed either by defendant No. 12 himself or by the plaintiffs. Defendant No. 1 had no locus standi to seek for transposition of a co-defendant as a plaintiff. Be that as it may, in course of hearing of this Civil Revision, the learned counsel who was appearing for the plaintiffs as well as defendant No. 12 as their stand is same, orally prayed that in fact, defendant No. 12 may be transposed as a plaintiff. If in ordinary course he is asked to file a petition before the trial Court, the matter is likely to linger there. In order to avoid any further delay in the matter and as the parties do not have any objection to defendant No. 12 being transposed as plaintiff . I accept the oral prayer of the defendant No. 12 and direct that defendant No. 12 shall be transposed as a plaintiff. 4. The counsel for the parties pray for early disposal of the partition suit. It is apparent from the records in a disposed of case, in M.A. No. 313 of 1997 that there is a direction for expeditious disposal of the suit. It is, therefore, directed that the suit should be disposed of as expeditiously as possible, preferably by end of October, 1998. The parties are directed to co-operate in the matter for expeditious disposal of the suit. It is, therefore, directed that the suit should be disposed of as expeditiously as possible, preferably by end of October, 1998. The parties are directed to co-operate in the matter for expeditious disposal of the suit. A certified copy of this order shall be produced by any of the parties to enable the trial Court to proceed accordingly. 5. The Civil Revision is accordingly disposed of. There will be no order as to cost.