JAGDISH CHANDER Vs. OM PIARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners impugn an order, dated 31.7.2006, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Gurdaspur, whereby an application, filed under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC, has been accepted.

(2.) THE petitioners herein filed a suit on 18.5.2006 for declaration to the effect that they are owners in possession of the land in dispute on the basis of a will, dated 17.7.1985, executed by their father Sant Ram. The petitioners also sought a declaration to the effect that mutation as well as entries showing the defendants-respondents as co-sharers were illegal, null and void.

(3.) COUNSEL for the petitioners states that respondents No. 4 and 5 are neither necessary nor proper parties and, therefore, have no right to be impleaded as parties, under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC. It is submitted that as these respondents are purchasers pendente lite, they have no independent right and are, therefore, bound by any order/judgment or decree that may be passed against their vendor Om Piari. It is further submitted that the reasoning, adopted by the learned trial Court, that Om Piari may not contest the suit properly, discloses a disregard to the provisions of Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act. Respondents No. 4 and 5 are neither necessary nor proper parties, and, therefore, could not be impleaded as defendants, whatever be the ground.