SHYAM SUNDER Vs. MUKESH KUMAR & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has impugned the order dated 16th July, 2011, whereby the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Bansoor, District Alwar dismissed the petitioner's application filed under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC, wherein he prayed to implead him as party.

(2.) Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused the relevant provisions of law as also the impugned order, it is noticed that the respondent plaintiff filed a suit for eviction and recovery of rent against the defendant before the learned trial court. During the pendency of the suit, the petitioner-applicant Shyam Sunder and respondent Om Prakash filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC imploring the court to implead them as party in the suit on the ground that the shop in dispute was got constructed by them along-with other shop. The shop in dispute was got constructed in the life time of their father, over which their all the brothers had equal right and share. The learned trial court after considering the rival submissions made by the parties dismissed the application filed under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC on the ground that no suit was filed with regard to ownership of the shop in question and rather, the suit was filed for eviction and recovery of rent. Learned trial court is found to have rightly dismissed the application filed by the petitioner under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC and the findings of the learned trial court are based on pure findings of the facts. The impugned order is found to have suffered from no infirmity and the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

(3.) Jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution cannot be exercised just with a view to upset the pure findings of facts. The extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 can be invoked only when the impugned order is found to be totally perverse or contrary to material or it results in manifesting injustice.