- (1.) Both these revision petitions have been taken up together for adjudication as the matter in controversy is the same in these petitions. For convenience and clarity, facts have been taken from CR No.3548 of 2014.
(2.) A suit for seeking a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants, interalia, from blocking the ingress and outgress of the plaintiffs to their house and to the Sheetla Mata Mandir located in front of the vacated site is pending adjudication before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Patiala. The plaintiffs have impleaded two defendants.
(3.) The application was moved by the applicants, petitioners herein, under Order I Rule 10 CPC for making them a party in the said litigation but the same has been dismissed by the lower court coming to a firm finding of fact that since the suit is for seeking a remedy of permanent injunction and no right, title or interest is to be decided, the applicants, petitioners herein, have no stakes in the litigation to be adjudicated. Relevant portion of the impugned order for ready reference is reproduced as below: "From a careful consideration of rival contentions, it is to be stated that the matter under consideration is regarding the injunction of the use of the suit property. Applicants are not in possession of the suit property so decision of the case will not affect the rights of the applicants as right of ownership is not in question in the present suit. As no cause of action has arisen to the applicants and as presence of applicants are not necessary for proper decision, so application in hand, is without merits and same is dismissed.";