VIDHYA CHAWLA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been directed against order dated 17.5.1991 passed by Sub Judge IInd Class, Karnal, allowing the application of the State Bank of India under Order 1 rule 10 read with Section 151, Code of Civil Procedure, for impleading Bank as defendant to the suit.

(2.) The petitioner filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against State of Haryana through Collector, Karnal, as well as Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Karnal, claiming that she is owner in possession of the property in dispute and has entered into an agreement to sell with one Nirmaljeet Chawla. She further claimed that recovery proceedings initiated by defendant No. 2. Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Karnal, are not binding upon her. It was also claimed by her that she has no concern whatsoever with the Society namely Adarsh Agricultural Implement Co-operative Society, and any liability of the said society cannot be fastened on her.

(3.) The suit is being contested by defendant. During the pendency of the suit, State Bank of India filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10, Code of Civil Procedure, for impleading the Bank as a necessary party. It was stated in the application that the Bank had advanced a loan of Rs. 20,000/- to Adarsh Agricultural Implement Co-operative Society on 13.10.1970 which was subsequently enhanced and the present outstanding amount comes to about Rs. four lacs. It was further alleged that the house in dispute was equitably mortgaged with the Bank. The application was contested by the plaintiff on the ground that State Bank of India is not a necessary party to the suit as no relief is being claimed against the Bank. Moreover, plaintiff being dominus litis, cannot be compelled to fight against a person against whom he does not wish to fight and against whom, he does not claim any relief. The learned trial Court allowed the application of the Bank. This order of the trial Court has been impugned in the civil revision.