IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 2209 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 1.4.2010. Darshan Singh and others ....Petitioners Versus Gurdeep Singh Toor and others ...Respondents CORAM : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present:- Mr. S.K. Singla, Advocate for the petitioners. RAJESH BINDAL, J **** The grievance raised by the petitioners in the present petition is to the observation made by the learned Court below while accepting the application filed by respondent No.1-plaintiff under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for impleading Bachan Kaur being legal heirs of Budha Singh to the effect that the property in dispute is joint Hindu family property and she is a co-sharer therein. Suffice to state that any observation made by learned Court below while deciding an application at interim stage is always tentative. In fact, in the pleadings, respondent No.1-plaintiff has claimed the property to be Joint Hindu Family property which has been denied by the petitioners in the written statement. So without there being any evidence on record, such observation cannot be said to be final. The claim of the parties has to be decided by the Court below after both the parties lead their evidence in support of their pleadings. Accordingly, it is clarified that the observation made by the learned Court below in stating that the property is Joint Hindu Family property and Bachan Kaur daughter of Budha Singh is one of the co-sharers shall not be taken as final. The issues shall be determined finally on the basis of evidence to be led by the parties. With this clarification, the present petition is disposed of. (RAJESH BINDAL) 1.4.2010. JUDGE Reema