Punjab-Haryana High Court
Bhupinder Singh vs Satinder Pal Singh And Another on 9 October, 2012
Author: A.N. Jindal
Bench: A.N. Jindal
Civil Revision No. 6434 of 2011 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Revision No.6434 of 2011 (O&M)
Date of decision: 09.10.2012
Bhupinder Singh
......Petitioner
Versus
Satinder Pal Singh and another
.......Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL
Present: Mr. Gurcharan Dass, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
*****
A.N. Jindal, J.
The respondents had been served, but none is in attendance. This petition assails an order dated 02.09.2011 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana, dismissing the application filed by the plaintiff-petitioner (hereinafter referred as 'the petitioner') under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for impleading Gurdeep Singh and Manpreet Singh as a party to the suit.
The petitioner had filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 14.08.2002 against Satinder Pal Singh etc. It is alleged that Gurdeep Singh and Manpreet Singh had forged and fabricated another agreement to sell dated 10.04.2003 purported to have been executed by Satinder Pal Singh etc. in their favour and have filed a suit on the basis of the said agreement, which is pending adjudication. As such, he wants to Civil Revision No. 6434 of 2011 (O&M) 2 implead them as party defendants to the suit and wants to amend the plaint accordingly.
The suit was filed by the petitioner in the year 2005. The application was filed in the year 2008, which was decided after three years on 02.09.2011. The case is still at the initial stage, as evidence has not so far been commenced. Since two agreements are the subject of controversy and Manpreet Singh and Gurdeep Singh also claim specific performance of the same land on the basis of the agreement dated 10.04.2003, which the petitioners claim on the basis of the agreement dated 14.08.2002, therefore, I deem it appropriate to allow this petition.
Resultantly, this petition is accepted; the impugned order is set aside and the application is hereby allowed.
(A.N.Jindal)
October 09, 2012 Judge
ajp