HRIDAYA NARAIN SINGH Vs. HIRA LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri B. N. Uppadhyay, holding brief of Sri Sankatha Rai, learned counsel appearing for the applicant and Sri S. K. Singh, learned counsel representing the opposite party No.1.

(2.) The plaintiff-opposite party No.1 instituted in the Court of Civil Judge, Mirzapur Suit No.202 of 1903 against Smt. Phulmati Devi, the defendant-opposite party No.2, for specific performance of contract of sale of certain agricultural property entered into between them on 8/06/1903. Sri Hridaya Narain Singh, the applicant in the instant revision, who is husband of the defendant-opposite party No.2, moved an application for his impleadment to the suit under O.1, R.10(2) of the Civil P.C., 1988, hereinafter called the Code.

(3.) The claim of the applicant for being impleaded to the suit was based on the assertion that, in fact, he was the owner of the property which was subject-matter of contract of sale sought to be enforced in the suit; and that Smt. Phulmati Devi, the defendant-opposite party No. 2, was holding the property benami. The application of the applicant for being impleaded as defendant in the suit has been rejected by the Court below by means of its order dt. 2nd Jan., 1988 holding that he is not entitled to be impleaded inasmuch as he is not party to the contract of sale sought to be enforced in the suit; and that if he was the real owner the decree passed in the suit will not bind him; and that as the decree passed in suit without impleading him would not bind him he will not suffer any injury.