NANDLAL Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the plaintiff in the suit challenging the order of the trial Court dated 8/1/2014 whereby the application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC filed by the respondent No.2 has been allowed.

(2.) In brief, the petitioner has filed the suit for declaration and permanent injunction claiming that the suit property was received by Daulatram S/o Ramrishna Brahmin from the Holker State in Inam and by the registered sale deed dated 30th July, 1973, he had sold it to one Kailashdevi and Kailashdevi by sale deed dated 18/6/1975 had sold it to the petitioners but the respondent State had got the name of the Collector mutated in the revenue record.

(3.) The respondent No.2 had filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC stating that the suit property was given in Inam to Daulatrm by Holkar State in his capacity as Vachak and that the respondent No.2 is the son of Daulatram and had hereditary right in the suit property and it could not be sold, therefore, he should be impleaded in the suit and given the opportunity to lead the evidence. The said application was opposed by the petitioner.