MEENA AND OTHERS Vs. OM PARKASH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in the present revision petition is to the order dated 3.11.2014 (Annexure P/2) whereby the application filed under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC by the present petitioners-applicants had been dismissed by the Lower Appellate Court, Bhiwani.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioners submits that the applicants were coparceners in the property in dispute and therefore were necessary party in the suit which has been decreed and therefore, should have been impleaded by the Lower Appellate Court in the appellate proceedings.

(3.) After hearing counsel for the petitioners, this Court is of the opinion that there is no merit in the present revision petition. A perusal of the facts would go on to demonstrate that Om Parkash and Ashok Kumar sons of Atam Parkash, respondents no.1 and 2 had entered into an agreement to sell the land in dispute on 24.1.2006. The petitioners are daughters of Om Parkash and Ashok Kumar. The suit for specific performance was filed on 19.5.2007 by respondents no.3 to 5. The suit was contested tooth and nail by respondents no.1 and 2 on all possible grounds but a decree has been passed on 29.9.2011 wherein the said respondents have been directed to perform their part of the agreement to sell within two months after passing of the decree on the payment of balance sale consideration. The said respondents filed appeal before the Lower Appellate Court in which the impugned order has been passed.