The High Court rejected a civil revision petition challenging the trial court's order allowing an interested party to be impleaded in a suit for declaration of title and perpetual injunction, holding that such decrees operate in rem.
Civil Revision Petition No.1842 of 2010 dismissed; miscellaneous petition disposed of.
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.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY
Civil Revision Petition No.1842 of 2010
ORDER:
The petitioner filed O.S.No.286 of 2008 in the Court of I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Nellore, against the 2nd respondent, for the relief of declaration of title and for perpetual injunction. During the pendency of the suit, the 1st respondent herein filed I.A.No.1222 of 2008 under Rule 10 of Order I C.P.C., with a prayer to implead him as defendant No.2, in the suit. He pleaded that the suit schedule property was purchased by him through a registered agreement of sale-cumgeneral power of attorney, dated 28.07.2008, for a sum of Rs.8,58,000/-. The application was opposed by the petitioner. The trial Court allowed the I.A., through order, dated 09.02.2010. Hence, this revision.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the 1st respondent.
Admittedly, the suit filed by the petitioner is the one for declaration of title and perpetual injunction. The decree, if passed in the suit, would operate against everyone, and it would be in rem. Therefore, any person, interested in the property is entitled to get himself impleaded in the suit and put forward his contention. It is only in the suit for injunction, that the plaintiff would have the liberty to choose the persons against whom he intends to claim the relief. The trial Court has taken correct view of the matter.
The C.R.P. is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
The miscellaneous petition filed in this civil revision petition shall also stand disposed of.
____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J.
Dated:08.11.2012
GJ
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY
Civil Revision Petition No.1842 of 2010
08.11.2012
GJ
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a person with an interest in the subject property is entitled to be impleaded in a suit for declaration of title and perpetual injunction pursuant to Order I Rule 10 of CPC.
Whether the trial court erred in allowing the application for impleadment of an interested party.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner
1st respondent
2nd respondent
L. Narasimha Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
