RITA DEVI Vs. HAZARI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil writ petition has been filed by the defendantspetitioners (for short 'the defendants') against the order dtd. 24/11/2023 passed by Additional District Judge No. 1, Neem Ka Thana (Sikar) in civil suit No. 10/2007 (2120/2014) titled as "Hazari Lal Vs. Rajesh and Ors." whereby the application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC filed by Abhilasha and Lucky (daughter and son of defendant No. 1-Rajesh Kumar) has been allowed and they have impleaded as party defendant Nos. 5 and 6.

(2.) Learned counsel for the defendants submits that the respondent Nos. 1 and 2-plaintiffs (for short 'the plaintiffs') had filed a civil suit against the defendants for specific performance, permanent injunction and cancellation of the sale deed dtd. 8/3/2007 in which Abhilasha and Lucky (daughter and son of the defendant No. 1-Rajesh kumar) filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for impleading them as a party defendant in the suit and the trial Court vide order dtd. 24/11/2023 allowed the application and impleaded them as a party defendant Nos. 5 and 6.

(3.) Learned counsel for the defendants also submits that plaintiffs sought relief for specific performance of the agreement dtd. 6/1/2000 which was executed between plaintiffs and defendant No.1-Rajesh Kumar and also sought relief of cancellation of sale deed dtd. 8/3/2007 which was executed by defendant No. 1 in favour of the other defendants. (D.B. SAW/621/2025 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders) Learned counsel for the defendants also submits that it is an admitted position that the disputed property was in the name of Shyam Lal and defendant No.1 Rajesh Kumar is adopted son of Shyam Lal. Defendant No.1-Rajesh Kumar is still alive. So, son and daughter of the defendant No.1-Rajesh Kumar had no right to be impleaded as a party defendant Nos. 5 and 6 because plaintiffs had not sought any relief against them but the trial Court had committed an error in impleading them as a party defendant Nos. 5 and 6. So, the order dtd. 24/11/2023 passed by the trial Court be set aside.