HARBHAJAN SINGH Vs. MALOOK SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By my this common judgment I would dispose of these two revision petitions bearing C.R. No. 2917 of 1998 titled as Harbhajan Singh and Ors. v. Malook Singh and Anr. and C.R. No. 1612 of 1999 titled as Tarlok Singh and Ors. v. Malook Singh and Ors.. Suit No. 272 of 199 was instituted by Harbhajan Singh and Ors. against Malook Singh and State of Punjab for declaration that the plaintiffs are owners in possession and the land measuring about 10 Kanals in Khasra No. 2616 min as head note of the plaint. They had also prayed for the relief of injunction. While Suit No. 151 of 1998 was instituted by Tarlok Singh and Ors. against Malook Singh and Ors. and State of Punjab for joint possession of the land measuring about 35 Kanals 2 Marlas and had also prayed for relief of injunction that the State of Punjab be restrained from alienating or transferring the property in favour of defendants No. 1 and 2. Both these suits are pending before the respective learned trial Courts.

(2.) Punjab Wakf Board filed an application for being impleaded as a party in both the above suits under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Punjab Wakf Board (hereinafter referred to as the applicant) claimed that they were owners of the property and the plaintiffs and defendants had not intentionally impleaded the Punjab Wakf Board as a party. They claimed to be necessary party to the suit, as they had interest in the subject matter of the suit. According to the applicant the property in question is a wakf property. As per the Central Gazette Notification, it is a grave yard and falls in the wakf property as per jamabandi for the year 1946-47. Thus, their presence before the Court was necessary to finally adjudicate the matter. This application was opposed by the other parties on the grounds that the applicant had no locus standi to file the present application and they have no interest in the property in question. It was further stated that the entry in relation to the suit property was wrongly recorded in the name of the custodian department and, therefore, State of Punjab has been impleaded as a party and the applicant has no concern whatsoever with the suit property.

(3.) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, the learned trial court vide their order dated 14.5.1998 (Suit No. 272 of 1997) and 5.2.1999 (Suit No. 151 of 1998), giving rise to the aforestated civil revision petitions being CR No. 2917 of 1998 and CR No. 1612 of 1999, allowed the said application and ordered the Punjab Wakf Board be impleaded as a party.