RAM PARKASH SAWHNEY Vs. MOHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The property of one Jia Lal Sawhney is the bone of contention in a civil suit wherein relief of partition by metes and bounds of a house, four shops and vacant land is sought. The petitioner is one of the sons of late Jia Lal Sawhney. The suit was filed almost two decades back. Petitioner was not impleaded as party defendant, while his son has been impleaded as party in the array of defendants. The suit which was commenced almost two decades back has covered the huge distance.

(2.) Application was filed by the petitioner seeking impleadment as defendant in the suit which has been conceded by the plaintiff while resisted by the defendants. Learned trial Judge dismissed the application vide its Order dated 05.04.2008. It is this order, which is called in question, in this revision petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that property is a co-parcenary property and the rights of the parties are to be determined in the suit for partition. Learned counsel submitted that petitioner has subsisting interest in the suit property and in his absence any lawful decree may not be passed by the court. Learned counsel further submitted that any decree passed in which petitioner is not a party is capable of being challenged by the petitioner and, therefore, it would be appropriate to allow the petitioner to participate in the proceedings, by impleading him as party defendant. Learned counsel, accordingly, prayed for allowing of the application seeking impleadment as party defendant pending on the files of Sub Judge, Jammu.