MUNISH CHANDER Vs. PEARL ELECTRICAL WIRES P LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by an order dated 15. 11. 2007 passed by the trial Court dismissing his application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, petitioner has preferred this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the order.

(2.) M/s. Pearl Electrical Wires Pvt. Ltd. filed a suit for possession and recovery of Rs. 1,08,000/- towards damages and mesne profits from defendant J. L. Narula in respect of property No. 67a/1, G. T. Karnal Road, industrial Area, New Delhi. The petitioner made an application under Order 1 rule 10 CPC claiming that he was the actual owner of the property. He has not transferred this property to M/s. Pearl Electrical Wires Pvt. Ltd. He was therefore, a necessary party in the suit.

(3.) THE suit was filed way back in the year 1993 by the plaintiff and the application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC was filed in the year 2007. The documents filed by the plaintiff showed that applicant was a partner in m/s. Archana Cable Corporation and the property in question at that time was the investment made by the applicant in the partnership firm. Thereafter, the partnership firm was converted into a company and the applicant (present petitioner) became a Director/promoter of the plaintiff company and he signed the resolution passed in the Board Meeting of the plaintiff company whereby a request was made to DDA to transfer the property in favour of the plaintiff since all the assets and liabilities of the partnership firm were transferred to the plaintiff company. After considering all these facts, trial Court came to the conclusion that the application was a frivolous one and the applicant/petitioner was not a necessary party.