SUKHMEET KAUR Vs. HARJINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved by the order dtd. 8/2/2022 (Annexure P-10) passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division) Garhshankar (for short 'the trial Court') whereby the application moved by respondent No.l-Harjinder Singh (for short 'the applicant') under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for being impleaded as a defendant in the Civil Suit preferred by the petitioners-plaintiffs (for short 'the plaintiffs') against respondents No.2 and 3-defendants No.l and 2 (for short 'defendants No.l and 2') and defendant No.3 (stated to have since expired) has been allowed, the plaintiffs have chosen to prefer the instant revision petition.

(2.) Bereft of unnecessary details, the facts leading to the filing of this petition, are that the plaintiffs filed the above-said Civil Suit against defendants No.l and 2 as well as defendant No.3-Harmohinder Singh for seeking a decree for permanent injunction to restrain defendants No.l and 2 from interfering in their lawful and peaceful possession over the suit properties, while averring that deceased-defendant No.3 was the father of plaintiff No.l and defendants No.l and 2 and he had inducted them (plaintiffs) as the permanent licensees in the said properties and defendants No.l and 2 had no concern with the same but they threatened to dispossess them from these properties forcibly and illegally. In their written-statement, defendants No.l and 2 asserted that their mother Resham Kaur had purchased the property, mentioned in the Head Note 'B' of the plaint, from one Avtar Singh and she, then, sold it to defendant No.l and her husband vide the Sale Deed dtd. 19/12/2005 and handed over its possession to them. Defendant No.l further sold the said property to Harjinder Singh, i.e the applicant, vide the Sale Deed dtd. 13/12/2017 and since then, he was in possession thereof as its owner. The above named vendee moved an application for being impleaded as the defendant in the Civil Suit, while claiming himself to be in possession over this property as its owner by virtue of the said sale deed and the same has been allowed vide the impugned order.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners-plaintiffs in the present revision petition and have also perused the file carefully.