Hari Kishan & Anr vs Manoharlal & Ors on 5 October, 2009

                                   1/2

               S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6331/2008
               (Hari Kishan & anr. vs. Manohar Lal & ors.)
                     DATE OF ORDER : 5/10/2009

               HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI


Mr.P.M.Vyas, for the petitioner.
Mr.C.P.Soni, for the respondent.



      This petition is directed against the order dated 3/7/2008,

whereby, the application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC filed by the

present petitioner came to be rejected by the learned trial court.

      The petitioner applicant submitted that the property in question

is a joint Hindu Family property which was under agreement in

question and agreed to be sold to the plaintiff. In the present suit for

specific performance, in order to have say in the matter, he was

necessary and proper party, therefore, he ought to have been

impleaded in the suit.

      On the other hand, Mr. Soni submits that since he is stranger to

the agreement itself, he cannot be impleaded as party to the suit,

therefore, the learned trial court was justified in rejecting the said

application.

      Having considered the submissions made at the bar and having

gone through the impugned order, this Court is satisfied that in the
                                   2/2

facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner-applicant was a

necessary and proper party in the suit lest it gives rise to further

unnecessary litigation, therefore, he ought to have been impleaded

party in the suit and be heard in the matter.

      Consequently, this writ petition is allowed and impugned order

dated 3/7/2008 passed by the learned trial court is set aside and

application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC filed by the present petitioner

applicant is allowed.



                                          (DR.VINEET KOTHARI),J.

Item no.48
baweja/-