ABHAI SINGH Vs. SHAILENDRA BAHADUR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -I have heard learned counsel for the revisionists. The three revisionists are defendants 5 to 7 in the civil suit pending in the Court of Civil Judge, Varanasi, whereby plaintiff seeks specific performance of the registered sale agreement executed in his favour by defendant no. 1 Bhartiya Vikas Company, a registered partnership firm. Defendants 2, 3 and 4 are said to be partners of this firm. The case set up against the defendants 1 to 4, as it appears, is that the firm is dealing with the business of colonisation; sale and purchase of land and that according to their partnership firm agreement each of the three partners was entitled to negotiate and settle the transaction of sale and the deed of sale was to be executed by all the three partners. The plaintiff came with the allegations that a registered sale agreement was executed in. favour of the plaintiff on 14-7-81 but the defendants failed to execute the sale deed and a dispute was thereafter raised informally before the Arbitrator wherein it was decided that the defendants shall execute the sale deed. Even this decision was not complied with and meanwhile defendant no. 4 executed sale agreement in favour of defendants 5 to 7 (present revisionists) two of them are the own sons of defendant no. 4 living with him and third is the brother- in-law of defendant no. 4. These agreements of sale are alleged to be fraudulent having been executed only to avoid the rights of plaintiff and that defendants 5 to 7 had full knowledge of the registered sale agreement in favour of plaintiff.

(2.) DEFENDANTS 5 of 7 claimed that they are unnecessary parties and an issue was framed on the point. It was taken up for consideration along with another issue of correct valuation of the suit. The learned Civil Judge by the impugned order decided both the issues. In so far as the issue relating to the plea of defendants 5 to 7 being not necessary party, the learned Civil Judge considered the factual aspect and recorded a finding that this plea can appropriately be considered and determined only after evidence of the parties is given in the suit. As such, he declined to decide this point as a preliminary issue.

(3.) THE revision lacking merit is dismissed in limine. Revision dismissed.