The Deputy Commissioner, vide order dated 6.01.2004 (Annexure P-7) after noticing the objections of SGPC in a petition titled as SGPC vs. Mahant Gurbachan Singh, sanctioned the mutation of the property in favour of Mahant Surjit Singh. The decree passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Barnala in favour of Surjit Singh was upheld by the Additional District Judge, Barnala, vide order dated 22.09.2000. The aforementioned order was assailed before the Divisional Commission, Patiala Division, Patiala and the said appeal was dismissed, vide order dated 24.08.2005. The second appeal was preferred before the Divisional Appeal S-I, Punjab Chandigarh but the same was also dismissed, vide order dated 13.05.2008. All these factors though would be subject matter of adjudication before the trial Court but for adjudication of the controversy in hand, it is to be seen as to “whether Surjit Singh would be proper and necessary party”, I am of the view that finding of the trial Court is not sustainable, for, it has not noticed all the aforementioned facts, i.e., the orders passed by this Court and as well as revenue Court orders ordering the mutation of the properties of Dera in favour of Surjit Singh.
