DHARAMPAL SINGH Vs. SATISH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since common questions of law and facts are involved in the aforementioned writ petitions, therefore, the same are taken up together and are being decided by this common judgment for the sake of brevity and convenience.

(2.) Petitioners have invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of the impugned judgment and order dtd. 30/11/2010, passed by Addl. District Judge III, Dehradun in Civil Appeal no. 58 of 2010 (arising out of misc. case no. 04 of 2009) Satish Kumar vs Dharampal and another, as also Civil Appeal no. 59 of 2010 (arising out of misc. case no. 05 of 2009), Satish Kumar vs Shyam Sunder and others.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that Shyam Sunder Chhabra, Ram Kishan Chhabra, Shankar Lal Chhabra and Smt. Prakash Rani filed a suit for partition in regard to the demised property, being suit no. 738 of 1993, Shyam Sundar Chhabra vs Vilayati Lal and others. Dharampal s/o late Harnam Das was defendant no. 3 in the aforesaid suit, whereof Vilayati Lal, father of respondent no. 1, was defendant no. 1 in the aforesaid suit. Father of respondent no. 1 filed his written statement and contended that late Smt. Lajwanti [mother of Vilayati Lal (defendant no. 1) and grandmother of the plaintiffs and mother-in-law of plaintiff no. 4] executed a Will dtd. 13/12/1973 in favour of defendant nos. 1 and 2 and their family members. During the pendency of suit, respondent no. 1 filed an impleadment application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC on 23/11/1996, being application no. 37A, supported by an affidavit (paper no. 38A) of respondent Satish. Objection thereon (paper no. 40C2) was filed by the plaintiffs against the impleadment application. The trial court vide order dtd. 8/10/1997 dismissed the impleadment application filed by respondent no. 1 Satish Kumar.