Panchuram vs Krishna
2022 Latest Caselaw 2168 Chatt

                     HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                            Order Sheet
                                        SA No. 855 of 2019

                                    Panchuram Versus Krishna




05.04.2022       Shri H.B. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Richa Dwivedi, counsel
             for the appellant.
                 Shri S.K. Agrawal, Panel Lawyer for the State.
                 Learned senior counsel of the appellant would submit that he has
             filed application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC to array daughters
             of the deceased as respondents No. 3,4 and 5. In the application it has

been specifically admitted that the trial Court has dismissed the suit for want of non-joining of the necessary party i.e. sisters of appellant while deciding issue No. 3. This stand was taken by the defendants and learned trial Court had framed issue No. 3 as under :-

"D;k okn vko';d i{kdkjksa ds vHkko esa vizpyu'khy gS+\ " Learned trial Court after appreciating the evidence and material on record decided issue No. 3 as "vizpyu'khy gksuk izekf.kr gSA". Against that order he had filed appeal before the Additional District Judge, Durg. Learned Additional District Judge, Durg after considering the entire facts and materials recorded finding that it has been clearly established that there is bar in the suit for non-joining of the necessary party. By this application, he seeks to fill up the lacunae. He would refer judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in case of Kanji and Others vs. Udiya and Another {(1991) AIR (MP) 354}.

The facts of the present case is distinguishable from the facts of the said case, as in the said case drkZ was impleaded as defendant after objection was raised, whereas in the present case even disputed the objection raised by the defendants, since no steps have been taken, that lacunae cannot be filled up at this stage by way of application under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC.

Accordingly, the application under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC is rejected.

List the matter after two weeks on admission.

Sd/-

(Narendra Kumar Vyas) JUDGE

Deshmukh