(1.) The Revisionists herein impugns the Order dtd. 21/9/2023, of the Court of the Learned District Judge, Special Division ' I, Sikkim, at Gangtok, in Title Suit No.26 of 2022 (M/s. Yama Enterprises Private Limited vs. Chewang Lhamu Bhutia), whereby the application under Order I Rule 10(2) read with Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, filed by the Revisionists, seeking impleadment as Defendants in the Suit was rejected.
(2.) It is submitted by Learned Counsel for the Revisionists that on coming to learn that Title Suit No.26 of 2022, had been filed by the Respondents for declaration, recovery of possession and consequential reliefs, Written Statement thereto was filed by the Respondent No.2 along with Counter-Claim, inter alia seeking a declaration that the suit property is in the name of Late Thukchuk Lachungpa and that he was the sole owner of the property. That, in such circumstances as the Revisionists No.1 and 2 i.e., are the widows of Late Thukchuk Lachungpa, and Revisionists No.3 and 4 are their respective progeny, all four are necessary and proper parties and ought to be impleaded in the said matter. That, the Learned Trial Court erroneously concluded that the Revisionists are not necessary parties to the Suit reasoning that the cause of action was with regard to possession and enjoyment of the suit property by the Defendants, in which other family members or the other widows of Late Thukchuk Lachungpa including the opposing Revisionists had no role to play and the Petition was accordingly dismissed, hence the instant Petition.
(3.) Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1 objecting to the said Petition submits that the dispute in the Title Suit is limited to the ownership of the suit property which was gifted by Late Thukchuk Lachungpa to the Respondent No.1 and has nothing to do with the other parties. Should the Revisionists be impleaded as parties the nature and scope of the Suit would be enlarged beyond the prayers made in the Plaint.