Single judge order dismissing a civil revision challenging the dismissal of an application to implead subsequent vendees in a specific performance suit filed by the original vendor. The court held that adding parties after evidence is complete is not permitted as the plaintiff remains master of the suit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Revision No. 1825 of 2012 (O&M)
Hoshiyar Singh and another
..... Petitioners
vs
Hazari Lal and another
..... Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present: Mr. Rajesh Lamba, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Rajesh Bindal J.
Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 14.2.2012 passed by the learned court below whereby the application filed by the petitioners for being impleaded as defendants in the suit was dismissed.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the suit was filed for possession by way of specific performance of agreement to sell and the petitioners being subsequent vendees are necessary party, hence, should have been impleaded in the suit.
A perusal of the paper-book shows that the suit was filed way back on 11.2.2006. After the entire evidence of the parties was complete and the case was fixed for arguments, the application in question was filed for being impleaded as party in the suit. The petitioners, in fact, are seeking to raise the question of title while disputing the ownership of the vendor in the agreement to sell, which is subject matter of the suit already filed. It cannot be permitted at this stage as the plaintiff is the master of the suit and cannot be compelled to contest the same against his wishes against any person.
The petition is dismissed.
(Rajesh Bindal) Judge
22.3.2012 vs.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a subsequent vendee seeking to raise a title question can be impleaded as a necessary party in a specific performance suit filed by the original vendor while the court was already on the final
Whether the plaintiff can be compelled to contest the suit against a party whose addition would alter the subject matter after the evidence is complete.
Whether the petitioner was a necessary party to the suit for possession by specific performance.
Hoshiyar Singh and another
Hazari Lal and another
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
