KAUSHALYA DEVI Vs. PARDEEP KUMAR SACHDEVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present revision petition, challenge has been made to an order dtd. 3/10/2011 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge, Abohar, whereby an application filed under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, at the instance of the petitioners-plaintiff, so as to implead one Nirmala Sachdeva as defendant No.2, has been dismissed.

(2.) Facts leading to the present case are that the petitioners-plaintiffs, claiming themselves to be successors of Piara Singh son of Prem Singh, filed a suit for possession as well as permanent injunction regarding Shop No.44 in Rani Jhansi Market, District Fazilka against respondentdefendant. The suit was filed on 2/1/2014 and the same was contested by respondent-defendant through written statement filed on 9/5/2014. Respondent-defendant disclosed in the written statement that his wife, namely, Nirmala Sachdeva was the owner in possession of the suit property.

(3.) While the evidence of the petitioners-plaintiffs was being recorded, an application was filed at their instance invoking Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for impleading Nirmala Sachdeva as defendant No.2. The aforesaid application was opposed by the respondent-defendant on the ground of delay and latches as well as for want of due diligence on the part of the petitioners-plaintiffs. The trial court vide its order dtd. 3/10/2011, dismissed the application moved by the petitioners-plaintiffs. Aggrieved against the aforesaid order, the petitioners-plaintiffs filed the present revision petition.