KARAN SINGH Vs. BRAHAM PARKASH AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition is directed against the impugned order dated 30.07.2016(Annexure P6), whereby the application submitted by the petitioner under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, in civil suit seeking permanent injunction,(Annexure P-3), titled as "Braham Parkash versus Dharmender", has been dismissed.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that prior to the institution of the suit, petitioner who is the father of the parties to the lis in the suit (Annexure P-3), had already filed a suit for declaration and consequential relief of permanent injunction and arrayed both sons i.e. Braham Parkash and Dharmender as defendant No.1 and 2, who are plaintiff and defendant in suit (Annexure P-3). It is on that account, the cause of action arose to file the application for impleadment as the suit property is identical in both the suits and the possession of the same is with the petitioner, thus, for all intents and purposes, the petitioner is not only proper but necessary party. Therefore, the trial Court ought to have allowed the application.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that the order declining the application is proper and justifiable as the courts below have applied the doctrine akin to Dominus Litis.