HAZURA SINGH Vs. SUKHDEV SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order of mine shall dispose of Civil Revision Nos. 3051 and 3116 of 1993. Plaintiff-Sukhdev Singh filed a suit for declaration to the effect that he is owner in possession of the suit land. Hazura Singh and Parmatma Singh (since deceased and now being represented through his legal representatives) filed applications under Order 1 Rule 10 C.P.C. for being impleaded as defendants in the suit. It was averred that Hazura Singh is in fact real brother of Partap Singh-defendant in the suit and the suit property is Joint Hindu Family Property, apart from its being ancestral one. The applicant has a share in the suit property. It is being cultivated jointly by defendant and the applicant. The suit has been filed in order to enable the plaintiff to play fraud and to defeat the rights of the applicant. In fact no family settlement has ever taken place, rather the plaintiff is trying to take advantage of unsoundness and incapabilities of the defendant.

(2.) THE trial Court returned a finding, although applicant and the defendant are joint owners yet they are having different and specific possession of the land. The common question to be decided with respect to family settlement and the applicant's claim having a share in the joint property are not going to be effected. Avoidance of multiplicity of litigation is no ground for impleading the applicant as party defendant to the suit. The learned trial Court has returned no finding with respect to the fact whether the applicant is a necessary or proper party which is the very basis for the applicant being impleaded as party.

(3.) THERE is no dispute with the proposition of law that plaintiff is dominus litus. No person can be impleaded unless he is a necessary or a proper party to the lis, to get his rights determined in the suit of another party.