Civil Revision No.5723 of 2010(O&M) [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... Civil Revision No.5723 of 2010(O&M) Decided on : February 28, 2011 Kamlesh ... Petitioner VERSUS Ramphal and another ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Arun Singal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr.Sandeep Kotla, Advocate for respondent No.2. A.N.JINDAL, J.- Heard. The petitioner has claimed that Pushpa Devi having transferred the suit property in his favour, has lost interest in the suit and he is to defend the case. If the suit is allowed to continue without impleading the petitioner as party, Pushpa Devi having no interest to defend the suit, certainly the rights of the petitioner shall be adversely affected and the case of the plaintiff would remain uncontested. In the circumstances, the Civil Revision No.5723 of 2010(O&M) [ 2 ] petitioner is a necessary party. Resultantly, the petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. While allowing the application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the trial court is directed to implead the petitioner as party defendant. February 28, 2011 ( A.N.JINDAL ) `gian' JUDGE