SHASHI PAL Vs. DESH RAJ AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present appeal the moot issue involved is as to whether learned first appellate court, in an appeal filed before it against the judgment and decree passed by learned trial court, whereby the suit so instituted by the plaintiff was dismissed, inter alia, on the ground that the suit was bad for non joinder of necessary parties, could have had allowed an application under Order 1, Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code (in short 'CPC') for impleading that party as defendant, non joinder of which had resulted in the dismissal of the suit and thereafter have had remanded the matter back to the learned trial court for fresh adjudication.

(2.) In brief, facts necessary for adjudication of the present appeal are as under: A suit filed by respondents/plaintiffs (here in after referred to as 'plaintiffs'), inter alia, for declaration that they along with defendants were joint owners in equal shares of the suit land and further that a gift deed got executed by defendant from his father, Lachman Dass @ Lachoo, dated 27.8.1990 was illegal, null and void so also were mutations etc. entered on the basis of same was dismissed by learned trial court vide judgment and decree dated 28.12.2013, inter alia, on the ground that deceased Lachman Dass in addition to Harbans Lal and Hans Raj were also survived by his daughters, who was a necessary party for adjudication of the case and as she had not been impleaded as a defendant, the suit was not maintainable as all necessary parties had not been impleaded as defendants.

(3.) Judgment and decree so passed by learned trial court was assailed by way of appeal by the plaintiffs. During the pendency of the appeal, application was filed by the appellants/plaintiffs under Order 1, Rule 10 of the CPC to implead Smt. Bhajni Devi daughter of Lachman Dass as party defendant in the appeal.