VIJAY KUMAR Vs. SUNIL KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against order dt. 20.9.13 passed by the Civil Judge (SD) Makrana, in Civil Suit No. 3/05, whereby an application preferred by the petitioner for impleading him as party to the suit, stands rejected. Briefly the facts are that the plaintiffs/landlord, the respondents No. 1 and 2 herein, filed a suit for eviction and recovery of mesne profit against the respondent -defendant/tenant before the Civil Judge (SD), Makrana. The suit is being contested by the defendant by filing a written statement thereto. The petitioner herein, preferred an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for impleading him as party to the suit on the ground that the disputed premises being ancestral property and keeping in view pendency of dispute between the parties before the Court of competent jurisdiction in respect thereof, as a co -sharer, he is a necessary party in the suit.

(2.) AFTER due consideration, the application stands rejected by the Court below observing that no relief is sought in the suit against the petitioner herein and the landlord and tenant relationship having been established between the parties, the suit can otherwise be decided on merits without impleading the applicant Vijay Kumar as party to the suit.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents supporting the order impugned, submitted that the Court below has committed no jurisdictional error in rejecting the application preferred by the petitioner for impleading him as party to the suit so as to warrant interference by this Court in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction.