H.S. BHATIA Vs. H.V. RAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is directed against the order dtd. 5/10/2016, passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Patiala (for short, the Trial Court), dismissing the petitioner's application filed under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, through which he had sought his impleadment in respondent No.1's suit.

(2.) The facts, in brief, which are required to be noticed for adjudicating upon the present petition are that respondent No. 1 filed a suit seeking therein permanent injunction to restrain respondents No. 2 and 3 from disconnecting the water/sewerage connection installed by them in H. No. 809/8, Gurbax Colony, Patiala (for short, the suit property). Such suit was filed by respondent No. 1 on the ground that he was owner in possession of the suit property and that respondents No. 2 and 3, under political pressure were contemplating to disconnect the water/sewerage connection to the suit property. On being put to notice, respondents No. 2 and 3 appeared before the Trial Court and disputed respondent No. 1's claim by inter alia submitting that he was not the owner of the suit property and that he had got the water connection in his name by fraudulent means. Before the Trial Court could frame the issues, the petitioner filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC seeking his impleadment as a defendant in respondent No. 1's suit primarily on the ground that it was he who was the owner of the suit property. The Trial Court rejected the petitioner's impleadment application through the order which is under challenge in the present proceedings.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner as also respondent No. 1 have been heard.