4. A perusal of the plaint of T(D)S No. 53 of 2007 discloses that the plaintiffs have claimed possession over the scheduled suit property, relying on the Gentzer's survey entry in the name of Jhunu Kahar. It is also claimed that the defendant 1st party entered into a collusive compromise dated 01.07.1988 with Shree Prasad Ram and others and illegally transferred the raiyati non-transferable land. These facts came to the knowledge of the plaintiffs only when the defendant no. 1- Paltan Ram lodged a criminal case against Mukesh Verma being Deoghar Case No. 328 of 2003. In the application dated 21.01.2011 under Order 1 Rule 10(2) C.P.C., the petitioners have merely asserted that they are the legal heirs of Most. Jeriya Kaharin and therefore, they should be added as defendants in the pending T(D)S No. 53 of 2007. On a pointed query whether the petitioners are in possession of the suit scheduled property, the learned counsel for the petitioners admits that the petitioners are not in possession of the suit property or even a part of the suit property is not in their possession. From the genealogical table furnished by the petitioners, it appears that the petitioners are claiming themselves the 4th generation descendant of Khiju Kahar however, in the application under Order 1 Rule 10(2) C.P.C., there is not even a whisper of any partition amongst the co-sharers. The petitioners have not
