HARBHAJAN SINGH Vs. SARUP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the order of the trial Court dated November 13, 1991 whereby the application filed by one Hirbhajan Singh for being impleaded as a defendant in a suit titled as 'samp Singh and Ors. v. Amar Singh and Anr. ' was dismissed.

(2.) SARUP Singh and his two brothers filed a suit for declaration to the effect that they were the owners in possession of agricultural land measuring 151 Kanals 11 Marlas on account of oral partition and the defendants, their father and the grandmother had no concern whatsoever with the same, and for permanent injunction restraining the latter from forcibly taking possession of the land in question or interfering with the possession in any manner.

(3.) HARBHAJAN Singh, petitioner moved an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure for being impleaded as a defendant in the aforesaid suit, stating that the plaintiffs and the defendants had connived with each other in order to cause wrongful loss to him, the plaintiffs had filed the suit in collusion with the defendants, the suit was collusive and the result of fraud and misrepresentation and that the defendants had no right to transfer the suit land in favour of the plaintiffs, the same being ancestral and joint Hindu family property. It was further stated in the application that the Petitioner was a coparcener in the suit land and the defendants had no legal right to alienate the same. The allegation of the petitioner of the property being ancestral and joint Hindu family property was denied. It was asserted on behalf of the plaintiffs that the property in question was the self-acquired property of the defendants and the petitioner had no right to move the application for being impleaded as a defendant, he being neither a necessary nor a proper party. The trial Court, as noticed earlier, dismissed the application.