RAMESH RAM Vs. VIJAY BHUSAN GARG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner-plaintiff has moved this Court by means of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dtd. 8/11/2023, whereby the revision bearing Revision No.59 of 2022-2023, Ramesh Ram vs. Bacchi Ram and others under Sec. 333 of the U.P. Zamindari and Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (for short 'the Act') has been rejected and the order passed by learned Assistant Collector, First Class dtd. 12/10/2022 was affirmed, whereby the application under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC moved by respondent nos.1 and 2 has been allowed.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(3.) A Revenue Suit No.22 of 2019 was instituted by the petitioner-plaintiff against his brothers-i.e. respondent nos.3 and 4, in respect of the property of Village Danpur, Tehsil Rudrapur, District U.S. Nagar. In the said revenue suit, an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC was filed by respondent nos.1 and 2 on 21/3/2022 to implead as party respondent in the aforesaid revenue suit on the ground that the part of the subject matter in the revenue suit was agreed to be sold out to the respondent nos.1 and 2 by respondent no.4-defendant and the date of agreement to sale is 14/1/2013 and in pursuance of the aforesaid agreement, a sum of Rs.31,75,000.00 was paid to the respondent no.4-defendant. The said application was allowed by learned Magistrate by reason of its order dtd. 12/10/2022 mainly on the ground that the respondent nos.1 and 2 has parted with some consideration towards agreement to sale dtd. 14/1/2013 and on the basis of the principle of natural justice, the application was allowed and they were directed to be made party to the proceedings. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order dtd. 12/10/2022, petitioner-plaintiff moved the Commissioner, Kumaon Division, Nainital by filing a Revision No.59 of 2022-2023, which too was rejected by learned Commissioner, Kumaon Division Nainital vide impugned order dtd. 8/11/2023.