In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh
Civil Revision No. 1376 of 2008 (O&M)
Smt. Kanta Devi ..... Petitioner
vs
Surinderpal and others ..... Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. J. P. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Jai Vir Yadav, Advocate, for respondents no. 1 to 3.
Mr. S. K. Yadav, Advocate, for respondent no. 4.
Rajesh Bindal J.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that earlier one
relinquishment deed dated 18.7.2001 was executed by Surat Singh relinquishing
the rights in the house in which the petitioner is living in favour of Jai Pal son of
Des Raj. The same was challenged by the petitioner in a suit which is subject
matter of regular second appeal before this court which is yet to be listed.
Subsequently, other relinquishment deed has been executed by Surat Singh on
14.11.2002 relinquishing his entire property including the house which was dealt
with in the aforesaid relinquishment deed in favour of Jai Pal his grandson i.e. son
of Des Raj. In a suit filed by Surinderpal son of Surat Singh, the same is under
challenge, wherein it is stated that property in dispute is joint Hindu family
property of father and three sons. The submission is that as in the suit the rights of
the petitioner, who is also daughter of Surat Singh may not be affected, she may
only be impleaded as proforma defendant as otherwise she does wish to file any
written statement or lead any evidence. It is for this reason that she would watch
the proceedings and in case any adverse order is passed against her, she will take
appropriate steps.
Learned counsel for the respondents do not have any objection in
case the petitioner is being impleaded as proforma defendant subject to the
statement made by the counsel for the petitioner that she will not file any written
statement or lead any evidence.
In view of the fair stand of the parties, the petitioner is directed to be
impleaded as proforma defendant subject to the condition that she will not file any
written statement or lead any evidence.
The petition is disposed of accordingly.
14.1.2009 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge