R.S. Chauhan, J. - (1.) MR . Brij Narayan Saini has challenged the order dated 24.8.2013 passed by the Additional District Judge No. 1, Bundi whereby the learned Judge has rejected the application filed by him under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that Jai Narayan Saini (the plaintiff/non -petitioner No. 1 before this court) had filed a suit for partition and for permanent injunction against his brother, Brij Narayan Saini (the petitioner before this court), against his father, Kanhaiya Lal, and against his uncle, Vijay Kishan. During the pendency of the suit, the petitioner filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC against the plaintiff. In the application, he pleaded that the plaintiff is seeking partition of ancestral property that belonged to their grandfather, Late Moti Shankar. Moti Shankar had two sons, namely Kanhaiya Lal and Vijay Kishan, and a daughter, namely Kanni Bai. Upon Moti Shankar's death, the property devolved as 1/3rd on each of his children. Kanni Bai willed her property in favour of the petitioner. Therefore, her share devolved down to him. His uncle, Vijay Kishan, had filed an appeal before the District Collector, but the same was dismissed. The petitioner had also filed a suit for partition which was decreed in his favour. However, the plaintiff has not prayed for setting aside of the judgment passed by the revenue court in his favour.
(3.) SECONDLY , that the plaintiff and the petitioner have another brother, namely Satya Narayan, and a sister, namely Sushila. But neither of these two persons have been impleaded as defendant in the civil suit. Thus, the suit suffers from non -joinder of parties.;