OM PARKASH Vs. DARSHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution challenges order dated 5.6.2003 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Hansi declining the prayer of the defendant-petitioner whereby he claimed that newly added defendant-respondents should be treated to have been granted permission for impleadment from the date of filing the application for all intents and purposes. The order passed by the learned Civil Judge reads as under :-

(2.) MR . Sunil Panwar, learned counsel for the defendant-petitioner has argued that under Order 1 Rule 10(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity, 'the Act') read with Section 21 of the Limitation Act, 1963 it is provided that the added defendant would be deemed to be a party-defendant from the date he has been joined as a party defendant in the civil suit.

(3.) AFTER hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that the order of the Civil Judge declining the prayer of the defendant- petitioner is unsustainable in the eyes of law. In that regard, it would be appropriate to make a reference to the provisions of Order 1 Rule 10(5) and Section 21 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Both the aforementioned provisions read as under :-