WAZIR GIAN SINGH Vs. WAZIR OMKAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri Rajeshwar Sharma son of Banarasi Lal Sharma resident of Patel Nagar, Jammu through the medium of application in hand, seeks his impleadment as party defendant in the civil original suit titled Wazir Baij Nath Vs. Wazir Mansa Ram and Others COS No.8/1972 on the grounds urged in the application.

(2.) The applicant's case is that Shri Bimla Devi widow of Wazir Tej Ram one of the defendants in the suit, vide sale deed executed on 10.02.1981 sold a plot of land measuring 2 kanals comprising of khasra No.4 situated at Nowabad, Tehsil, Jammu out of the suit land to Shri Banarasi Lal Sharma father of applicant and that Shri Banarsi Lal Sharma vide Gift Deed dated 5th Dec., 1998 registered on 16th Dec., 1993 transferred the aforesaid plot to the applicant. The applicant claims to be in possession of the aforesaid land as owner thereof and therefore entitled to be impleaded as party defendant to the suit. It is pleaded that the applicant is a necessary party to suit on account of events subsequent to the date of suit was filed, because of transfer of interests in the suit property by one of the defendants the applicant in terms of Order 22, Rule 10 Civil Procedure Code deserves to be impleaded as party defendant.

(3.) The application is opposed inter alia on the grounds that the Sale Deed 474 CNIL COURT CASES 2013(3) executed by Smt.Bimla Devi in favour of Banarasi Lal Sharma is void and of no legal consequence inasmuch as the permission granted by the Court in favour of Bimla Devi permitting her to execute Sale Deed, related to bind situated at village Kundoria and not Nowabad, Jammu. It is further pleaded that the possession of the subject matter of the Sale Deed was at no point of time handed over actually or constructively to the father of the applicant and that the applicant is not in possession of the said plot. It is further pleaded that Shri Bimla Devi was not the only legal heir of the deceased Tej Ram and therefore not competent to execute the Sale Deed in favour of Banarasi Lal Sharma. The applicant, according to the non-applicants is a stranger to the suit and not entitled to be arrayed as party either under Order 1, Rule 10 Civil Procedure Code or Order 22, Rule 10 of the Court. It is disputed that the applicant is a proper and necessary party in the suit. The non-applicants resist the application, also on the ground that the applications is belated and not enteatainable after long, inordinate and inexplicable delay of a little more than two decades, The applicant in his rejoinder filed on 12.08.2009, has disputed the non-applicant's claim that the Sate Deed executed on 10.02.1981 by Bimla Devi in favour of Banarasi Lal Sharma, related to plot of land other than one for which permission was granted by the High Court or that the Sale Deed for the said reason are void, without any rights, flowing therefrom in favour of the applicants father. The said deed, is claimed to have been executed by Smt.Bimla Devi in presence of her daughter and the local patwari and therefore, free from any coercion or undue influence. The High Court while granting permission to Smt.Bimla Devi vide its order dated 20th March, 1974 to sell land measuring 9 kanals 12 marlas is said to have granted the permission subject to the conditions that the transaction would be subject to final disposal of the suit. The stand taken by Smt.Bimla Devi in her objections is stated to be belief by her stand viz-a-viz mutation attested in favour of Shri Banarsi Lal Sharma, that recording to the applicant was never questioned or challenged by Smt.Bimla Devi.