KARNAIL SINGH Vs. GURBAX SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this revision petition, the petitioner has impugned order dated 12.12.2000 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kharar whereby an application under Order 1, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short "the Code") moved by the present petitioner for impleading one Amarjeet Singh son of Malkiat Singh who was said to be a subsequent transferee from Gariboo-defendant No. 1, has been dismissed.

(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner filed application for impleadment of the aforesaid Amarjeet Singh as party to the suit immediately on coming to know of this fact on production of the record by the Punjab Urban Development Authority (for short "PUDA") on 28.4.1999 and, therefore, aforesaid Amarjeet Singh being a necessary and proper party ought to have been impleaded as defendant.

(3.) AFTER hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I find considerable force in the contention of counsel for the respondents. The trial Court had rightly dismissed the petitioner's application for impleadment of Amarjeet Singh as party to the suit. It is not disputed that in the reply filed by PUDA to the legal notice served by Desa - plaintiff, it had been specifically mentioned that the plot in dispute had been transferred by Gariboo in favour of Amarjeet Singh and this fact came to the knowledge of the petitioner even prior to the filing of the suit. Further knowledge is attributed to the petitioner on the basis of written statement filed by PUDA which had been filed on 15.12.1995. Counsel for the petitioner could not give satisfactory explanation for filing the application for impleadment at such a belated stage. The trial Court, while rejecting the petitioner's prayer has observed in para 4 of its order as under :-