MAHENDRA SINGH Vs. DEVI GIR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiffs application in revision directed against an order passed by the learned Munsif dated 2-8-77 allowing an application filed by two persons, namely, opposite party No. 1 Devi Gir and Ved Gir in a suit filed by the plaintiff-applicant against the opposite parties other than opposite party No. 1.

(2.) The relevant facts are these. The plaintiff-applicant filed a suit for injunction restraining the opposite parties from interfering with the plaintiff-applicant's possession over the land in suit and from allotting the land, which is the subject-matter of the suit, or any part thereof to anyone else. The plaint allegations were that the land in question originally belonged to Ram Gir, who was the chela of one Govind Gir, that in the lifetime of Sri Ram Gir, the plaintiff and the father of defendant No. 3 came into possession over the land in suit and they have been continuing in possession ever since then, that the defendants were illegally interfering with the possession of the plaintiff and were threatening to allot the land in suit to others and hence the suit. During the pendency of the suit, an application (No. 49/C) was moved on behalf of the opposite party No. 1 and his brother Ved Gir for being impleaded on the ground that they were in possession over the land in suit, being chela of Ram Gir aforesaid, and that after the death of Ram Gir, his chela Karim Gir remained in possession over the disputed land and thereafter the two applicants were in possession over the land in suit. They alleged that they were directly concerned with the properties which are the subject-matter of suit and being in possession over the same, it was necessary in the interest, of justice that they be impleaded. In support, of their application, the two applicants, namely, Dev Gir and Ved Gir, also filed some documents establishing that Ram Gir was in possession over the disputed land, and that they were also connected with the property in question, as successors of Ram Gir It seems that these two applicants claimed the property as belonging to some Muth.

(3.) The trial court has allowed this application holding that the two applicants were necessary and proper parties.