Punjab-Haryana High Court
Harpreet Kaur vs Davinder Singh And Others on 13 March, 2024
Author: Anil Kshetarpal
Bench: Anil Kshetarpal
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:036803
CR-14-2023 (O&M) 1 2024:PHHC:036803
131 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CR-14-2023 (O&M)
Date of decision: 13.03.2024
Harpreet Kaur
....Petitioner
Versus
Davinder Singh and others
..Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL
Present:- Mr. Manbir Singh Batth, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr. Sunil Rana, Advocate for respondent no.1
Mr. M.S.Dhami, Advocate for respondent no.2
Mr. S.S.Siao, Advocate for respondent no.3
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J (Oral)
1. In this revision petition, the plaintiff impugns the
correctness of the trial court's interlocutory order permitting the
impleadment of Sh.Jaswinder Singh as a defendant in his suit for the
specific performance of the agreement to sell.
2. In this case, some relevant facts, in brief, are required to be
noticed in order to comprehend the controversy involved in the present
case.
3. Sh.Davinder Singh is the owner of the property. Two suits
have been filed for claiming the relief of the specific performance of the
different agreements to sell against Sh.Davinder Singh. The suit filed by
Sh.Jaswinder Singh was decreed on 08.05.2019. He filed an application
for impleadment in the suit filed by Smt. Harpreet Kaur for specific
performance of the agreement to sell executed by Sh.Davinder Singh.
The aforesaid application has been allowed by the court. Learned
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:036803
CR-14-2023 (O&M) 2 2024:PHHC:036803
counsel representing the petitioner contends that in a suit for the specific
performance of the agreement to sell, Sh.Jaswinder Singh has been
wrongly impleaded as a party as the petitioner cannot be forced to
litigate against a stranger and the plaintiff being dominus litis is the
master of his suit. He relies upon the judgment passed by the Supreme
Court in Bharat Karsondas Thakkar vs. M/s Kiran Construction
Co.& Ors 2008 AIR (SC) 2134.
4. This Court has considered the submissions made by the
learned counsel representing the parties.
5. It is evident that today Sh.Jaswinder Singh has a decree for
the specific performance of the agreement to sell in his favour against
Sh.Davinder Singh. Sh.Jaswinder Singh has all the rights to protect the
validity of the aforesaid decree. He also has interest in the suit property,
which is common in both the suits. The trial court has allowed the
application. If the argument of the learned counsel representing the
petitioner is accepted, there are chances of two conflicting decrees being
passed by the court. On one hand, there will be a decree in favour of
Sh.Jaswinder Singh and on the other hand, there will be a decree in
favour of petitioner- Smt. Harpreet Kaur, which will create an
anomalous situation. By permitting the impleadment, the court has
allowed Sh.Jaswinder Singh to contest the case. This would enable the
court to comprehensively decide the case while deciding all the issues
which may arise between the parties.
6. This Court has carefully read the judgment passed in
Bharat Karsondas Thakkar's case (supra). In the peculiar facts of the
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:036803
CR-14-2023 (O&M) 3 2024:PHHC:036803
aforesaid case, the Supreme Court held that such application could not
be allowed.
7. It may be noted here that in Thomson Press (India) Ltd.
Vs. Nanak Builders & Investors P. Ltd. and others (2013) 5 SCC
397, the Supreme Court has examined this issue at a great length. The
court has held that even a subsequent purchaser, who has purchased the
property in violation of injunction order, should be impleaded as party in
the suit for the specific performance of the agreement to sell so as to
enable the court to comprehensively decide the case.
8. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, no ground to interfere
is made out.
9. Hence, dismissed.
10. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also
disposed of.
13.03.2024 (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
rekha JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
