Civil Revision No. 7469 of 2009 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Civil Revision No. 7469 of 2009 Date of Decision: 6.7.2010 Genesh Behl and Others …Petitioners Versus Prem Singh Cheema and Others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. V.K. Sandhir, Advocate for the petitioners. None for respondent No.1. Mr. Anil Chawla, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3. Mr. Sandeep Khunger, Advocate for respondent No.4. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) One Prem Singh Cheema has filed a suit for permanent injunction against Onkar Nath Behl, Ajay Behl and Municipal Corporation, Amritsar, praying that the disputed property is a park and the defendants be restrained from interfering in the area shown as a park. The suit filed by Prem Singh Cheema was dismissed by the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Amritsar, vide its judgment dated 19.9.2005 (Annexure P1). Aggrieved against the same, he filed an appeal. In the appeal, an application was filed under Order I Rule 10 CPC praying that Radha Rani Behl, Rama Khanna, Sudha Mehra, Arun Civil Revision No. 7469 of 2009 2 Behl and Ganesh Behl be impleaded as party to the appeal. Vide impugned order dated 22.5.2009 (Annexure P4),the Additional District Judge, Amritsar, declined their application holding that the appellant/plaintiff is a master of his suit and no party can be impleaded against his wishes. Aggrieved against the same, present revision petition has been filed. During the course of arguments, it has been admitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that any finding of the Appellate Court will be a judgment in persona and not a judgment in rem. It has further emerged that the petitioners have also instituted a suit for determination of the nature of the property, against defendants No.1 and 2 therein. No fault can be found with the reasoning adopted by the Additional District Judge, Amritsar. Hence, no interference is warranted in the present revision petition and the same is dismissed. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners prays that liberty be granted to the petitioners to file a suit for declaration that the property in question is owned by the petitioners. Needless to say, there is no bar for the petitioners to opt for this recourse. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge July 6, 2010 “DK”