IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 315 of 2010 Date of decision: 1.9.2010 Jagmohan Khanduja …. Petitioner Versus Sh.Yamin & others ….. Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting ? No. For the petitioner: Mr.Ramakant Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: None. _____________________________________________ Deepak Gupta, J.(Oral) 1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 2.8.2010 whereby the learned trial court has permitted the defendants No.11 to 21 to file written statement in their independent right. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the ‘plaintiff’) filed a suit for specific performance of a contract whereby the defendant No.1 Latif Mohammad acting as General Attorney of his wife, defendant No.2, Smt. 2 Bashiri had agreed to sell the property of his wife, defendant No.2 Smt. Bashiri to the plaintiff. During the pendency of this suit, Bashiri died. Bashiri had two daughters Shakuri and Gafoori. Shakoori also died during the pendency of the first application moved for bringing on record the Legal Representatives of Bashiri. Therefore, her legal representatives, i.e., defendants No.11 to 20 were ordered to be brought on record. Gafoori is defendant No.21. 3. These two sets of defendants, i.e., the LRs of Shakoori, defendants No.11 to 20 and the defendant No.21, Gafoori prayed that they have an independent right to defend the suit. According to them, the property, in question, was originally owned by one Rehamtulla. The case of defendant No.1 as well as the LRs of late Smt.Bashiri was that Rehamtulla had bequeathed his entire property in favour of his widow Smt.Bashiri. The contention of the newly added defendants is that under Muslim law, Rehamtulla had no right to bequeath his entire property in favour of his wife. This contention has been contested by the plaintiff but the learned Trial Court has held that the newly added defendants 3 No.11 to 21 have a right to file written statement in their independent capacity. 4. In my opinion, there is no illegality in this order. At the stage of allowing the application, rights of the parties are not determined. What is the position under Muslim Law is an issue which will be decided at the time of hearing of the suit. However, the newly added defendants once they claim an independent inherent right in the property itself do have a right to file independent written statement. 5. According to the petitioner, both the daughters were consenting parties to the Will executed by Rehamtulla in favour of Bashiri, and , therefore, cannot be permitted to contest the correctness of the Will. This is also an issued which has to be decided after trial but the newly added defendants cannot be denied his right to file written statement at this stage. 6. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No order as to costs. September 1, 2010 ( Deepak Gupta ) (m) Judge