SHASHIKALA SINGH Vs. CHAND KANWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order (Annexure-5) by which the application submitted by the defendant for impleading the purchasers of the property as party to the suit has been rejected.

(2.) THE suit was filed in the year 2003 by the plaintiff-respondent for partition of the property left behind by the common ancestors. The defendant-petitioner filed a reply alleging therein that part of the property had been sold by the plaintiffs and, therefore, the purchasers of the property should be impleaded as party to the suit.

(3.) THE learned trial court having considered the contents of the application and the facts of the case, came to the conclusion that in the suit for partition since the purchasers are not the co-sharers in the same, they are not necessary party to the suit. The application submitted by the defendant-petitioner, in the facts and circumstances of the present case has rightly been rejected as in a suit for partition only the co-sharers having share in the property are the necessary and proper party. The purchasers of the property being the third party cannot be said to be concerned with the property of the deceased and they cannot be said to be the necessary and property party so far as the determination of the share in the property of the deceased is concerned. Moreover, the property admittedly was sold in the year 1992 i. e. about eleven years prior to the filing of the suit and in case the petitioner is aggrieved, the petitioner has a separate cause of action in that behalf.