MAURICE Vs. SHAMBHU DAYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against the order, dated 6 December, 1986, passed by SubJudge, 1st Class, Delhi whereby petitioners' application underorder I Rule 10, CPC for impleadment as a party in Suit No. 525 of 1982 was dismissed.

(2.) It appears from the lower Court's record that one Mohan Lal, claiming to be in physical possession of the premises bearing No. 1090/2, Ward No. 1, Mehrauli, New Delhi, filed a Suit (No. 593/81) seeking a declaration that he was entitled to the possession of the said premises, against the petitioners herein and one Shambhu Dayal who was impleaded as a proforma defendant. Subsequently, the said Shambhu Dayal, also filed a Suit (No. 525 /82) for declaration and injunction against the said Manohar Lal, claiming that he was a tenent in the aforesaid premises. However, the petitioners, who also claimed to be in possession of the premises, were not impleaded as parties to the suit.

(3.) The petitioners filed an application for their impleadment as defendants in Suit No. 525/82 on the plea that it was necessary for complete and effectual adjudication and for avoiding multiplicity of proceedings. As noted above the application has been dismissed by the Trial Court on the ground that the petitioners have not alleged that they are necessary parties to the suit.