SINGAR KANWAR Vs. DHOOPCHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application in revision by the plaintiff Mst. Singar Kanwar against the order of Munsif, East Jaipur, dated the 20th October, 1951. The plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of rent against the defendant opposite party on the basis of a rent note dated the 31st October, 1947 executed by him in her favour. It was averred that the defendant had paid to her rent till 19th October, 1948, so she claimed Rs. 293/5/3 for arrears of rent from 20th October, 1948 to 9th January, 1950. The defendant opposite party admitted the rent-note but it was pleaded that he had executed it under undue influence, that the real landlord of the property was one Hari Singh who was an adopted son of the plaintiff's husband Beri Sal Singh. Hari Singh also filed a petition before the trial court that he should be impleaded as a party in this case. The trial court therefore passed an order on the 20th October, 1951 directing the plaintiff to implead Hari Singh as a defendant. It is against this order that the plaintiff has come to this Court in revision.

(2.) IT is contended by the applicant's learned advocate that Hari Singh is not a necessary party, that the question regarding the validity of his adoption would unnecessarily be raised in the present suit, that the trial court has committed material irregularity in the exercise of its jurisdiction in allowing a third party to set up his title in a rent suit and therefore, it, only should be set aside. The opposite party who is present in person has not been able to justify the order of the trial court with reference to any law.