IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.2523 of 2010 Date of Decision: 09.09.2010 Surjit Singh ........Petitioner Versus Gurmeet Singh and another .......Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present: Mr. M.K.Singla, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P.S.Sekhon, Advocate for respondent No.1. ****** VINOD K.SHARMA, J. (ORAL) The petitioner has invoked the revisional jurisdiction of this Court to challenge the order passed by the learned trial Court, vide which the application moved by the petitioner under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC to be impleaded as party in the suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent for specific performance of an agreement to sell, stands dismissed. The learned trial Court was right in dismissing the application as the petitioner could not be said to be either necessary or proper party, merely on the ground that he had also an agreement to sell in his favour qua the land in dispute. No fault can be found with the order passed by the learned trial Court. Learned counsel for the respondent points out that with respect to the same suit land, there is an agreement prior in time in favour of the petitioner, and that he has also filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell. Civil Revision No.2523 of 2010 -2- In order to avoid contradictory judgment, it would be fair and proper, if both the suits, one filed by the plaintiff titled as Gurmeet Singh Versus Rajwinder Singh and the other, out of which present revision has arisen, are ordered to be consolidated. With above observation, directing consolidation of the two suits, this revision is dismissed. September 09, 2010 (Vinod K. Sharma) Gagan Judge