RAHUL VERMA Vs. NARESHDEVI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 13/2/2015 passed by the Fourth Additional District Judge, Morena in case No. 8 -A/13. Petitioner's application under Order I Rule 10 CPC has been rejected.

(2.) FACTS necessary for disposal of this writ petition are to the effect that the plaintiff has filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction claiming relief of declaration in respect of suit property described in schedule -I and II with red ink of her ownership and possession with further relief that the suit property is not that of defendants or joint family property on the premise that partition was effected amongst the father -in -law of plaintiff and defendants (his sons) in the past and thereafter all the defendants are in possession of respective shares forming their own smaller Hindu Undivided Family. The suit property is purchased by the plaintiff out of her own funds by way of registered sale deeds dated 16/9/1982, 24/10/1981 and 5/11/1981 and accordingly, plaintiff's name has been mutated in the revenue record. The suit property is self acquired property of the plaintiff and not the ancestral property.

(3.) THE applicant, who is the son of defendant no.2, has filed an application under Order I Rule 10 CPC alleging that the suit property is the ancestral property and not purchased by the plaintiff out of her own funds and, therefore, he may be added as a party to the suit. The trial court by a detailed order has rejected the application.