1. - At the request of respondent no.1 the matter is heard finally in view of the fact that the application of the respondent no.1 was allowed by the trial court, which is challenged by the petitioner, who opposed the application in the trial court.

2. The trial court vide impugned order dated 14.10.2008 allowed the application filed under Order 8 Rule 9 C.P.C and took on record the rejoinder filed by the plaintiff.

3. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the plaintiff in his plaint in para no.3 clearly stated that property of plot no.29(c) of Madhuban Colony, Udaipur was purchased by the sale proceeds of the ancestral property of Pyar Chand situated in village Railmagra of Tehsil Rajsamand. In rejoinderr the plaintiff has changed his case and also prayed relief altering his original relief which was claimed in the original plaint. It is also submitted that even plaintiff wants to withdraw his admission about the petitioner-defendant no.1 being wife of Madan Lal by filing rejoinder. It is also submitted that the trial court has not considered the application properly and without application of mind has allowed the application of the plaintiff filed under Order 8