JUDGMENT This writ petition has been filed against the order dated 24.8.2009 passed in counter claim to the Title (D) Suit No. 2 of 2000, registered as Title (Eviction) Suit No. 94 of 2000 by the Subordinate Judge-II, Deoghar allowing the prayer made on behalf of one Damodar Prasad Singh to implead him as plaintiff no. 2 in the suit. It is submitted that in the sale deed dated 30.4.2003 executed by original plaintiff, Arun Kumar Das in favour of Damodar Prasad Singh, only this much was said that the sale will be subject to the decision of Title (D) Suit No. 2 of 2000 which was filed for specific performance of contract and there was no mention of Title (Eviction) No. 94 of 2000 and, moreover until and unless Damodar Prasad Singh adopts the case of the original plaintiff Arun Kumar Das and claims the reliefs which were sought by the original plaintiff, Arun Kumar Das, he could not be impleaded as plaintiff no. 2. It appears that after hearing the parties and considering the relevant aspects, the learned court below has allowed the prayer on the ground that the sale was made subject to the result of Title Suit No. 2 of 2000 and, therefore, to avoid multiplicity of suit, Damodar Prasad Singh was allowed to be added as co-plaintiff. It goes without saying that the petitioner is always at liberty to contest the counter-claim being Title (Eviction) Suit No. 94 of 2000 on all the grounds available to him under the law. Moreover, both the suits have been ordered to be heard analogous in W.P. (C) No. 4887 of 2009. The parties are directed to cooperate in early disposal of both the suits. In the circumstances, I do not find any reason to exercise my supervisory power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. However no order as to costs.