JUDGMENT : 1. Heard. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties. Learned Counsel for the respondents, waive notice. 3. The challenge to this writ petition is to an order dated 06.07.2019 passed by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, in Regular Civil Suit no. 44 of 2018/F, by which an intervention application was allowed and the applicants therein were allowed to be impleaded as defendant nos. 2 to 4. The said applicants who have been impleaded are the parents of the petitioner and his siblings. The order proceeds on the basis that the impleadment is subject to condition that only issues relating to the grant of specific performance of the contract will be gone into in the suit. The operative portion in paragraph 25(e) reads as follows : "25(e) It is made clear that the impleadment is subject to the condition that only issues relating to the grant of specific performance of the contract will be gone into in the suit.” 4. In my view, the scope of the suit cannot be curtailed in this manner that too on an application for impleadment. The order, therefore, cannot be sustained. 5. The parties today agree that the petition may be disposed and that the impugned order may be set aside and the matter remanded to the trial Court to be considered afresh on merits after hearing both the sides. 6. The petition is therefore liable to be allowed and on this basis, I pass the following Order : (i) Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). The impugned order dated 06.07.2019 passed by the Civil Judge Junior Divsion at Margao in Regular Civil Suit No. 44 of 2018, is hereby set aside. (ii) The trial Court shall consider the application afresh and decide it on merits after hearing both the parties uninfluenced by the disposal of this writ petition. (iii) The Petition stands disposed of.