PANKAJ PUROHIT
Ramesh Ram – Appellant
Versus
Vijay Bhusan Garg – Respondent
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
Pankaj Purohit, J.—Petitioner-plaintiff has moved this Court by means of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 08.11.2023, whereby the revision bearing Revision No.59 of 2022-2023, Ramesh Ram vs. Bacchi Ram & others under Section 333 of the U.P. Zamindari and Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (for short “the Act”) has been rejected and the order passed by learned Assistant Collector, First Class dated 12.10.2022 was affirmed, whereby the application under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC moved by respondent nos.1 & 2 has been allowed.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. A Revenue Suit No.22 of 2019 was instituted by the petitioner-plaintiff against his brothers-i.e. respondent nos.3 & 4, in respect of the property of Village Danpur, Tehsil Rudrapur, District U.S. Nagar. In the said revenue suit, an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC was filed by respondent nos.1 & 2 on 21.03.2022 to implead as party respondent in the aforesaid revenue suit on the ground that the part of the subject matter in the revenue suit was agreed to be sold out to the respondent nos.1 & 2 by respondent no.4-defendant and the date of agr
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.