IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR-5647-2025 (O&M)

Date of Decision: 26.08.2025 Kuldeep Singh ......Petitioner Vs.

Dev Karan and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present : Mr. Anoop Singh Sheoran, Advocate, for the petitioner.

****

SUDEEPTI SHARMA J. (ORAL)

1. The present petition is preferred against the impugned order dated 27.05.2025 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Charkhi Dadri, whereby, the application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC filed by the petitioner for impleading him as defendant in the civil suit, was dismissed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Charkhi Dadri, has wrongly dismissed the application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC filed by the petitioner, whereby, he had sought for his impleadment as defendant in the civil suit.

Hence, he prays that the present revision petition be allowed.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file with his able assistance.

4. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the petitioner filed application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for his impleadment as defendant in the civil suit. The civil suit was filed for declaration and permanent/ mandatory injunction, wherein, relief sought by respondent No.1 is regarding ownership and joint possession over the suit land as per Jamabandi (2012-13) and Sale Deed No.908 dated 26.09.2017 executed by respondent No.1 in favour of respondents No.2 to 6 as the same was illegal, null and void on the ground of non-payment of sale consideration. Further for restraining respondents No.2 to 6 for disposal of suit land in any manner on the basis of sale deed.

5. It has been rightly observed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Charkhi Dadri, that neither the copy of the said sale deed nor Jamabandi (2012-13) of suit land, which is part of record, shows any legal right of the petitioner in suit land. The matter of the sale deed remained between respondent No.1 and respondents No.2 to 6. Further that the petitioner has filed another Civil Suit No.895/2017 titled as ‘Kuldeep and others Vs. Dev Karan and others’, wherein, he has claimed his ownership and possession rights. Further once the petitioner has separately claimed his right in another suit qua the same suit land and even challenged the aforesaid sale deed of respondent No.1, therefore, impleadment in the suit by moving an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC has rightly been dismissed.

6. In view of the above, I do not find any infirmity or illegality in the impugned order dated 27.05.2025 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Charkhi Dadri, and the same does not warrant any interference by this Court. Consequently, the said impugned order dated 27.05.2025 is upheld and accordingly, the present petition is hereby dismissed

7. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

(SUDEEPTI SHARMA)

JUDGE

26.08.2025 Virender Whether speaking/non-speaking : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No