t( iSGARH AT >PUR Writ Petition SArt.2275 hio.e873 of 2011 ?etitioners 1. Ramesh Chandra 'v'erma, S/o Late Piaintiffs Shri Bharat Chandra Verma, aaed about 57 years, Occupation- Prlncipsl, R/o Laibag, Houslng Board Colony, M-21, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 2. <S!, Umesh Chsndra Verma, S/b Shri Bharat Chandra Verma, aged about 63 ysars, R/o L.I.G.-371, Dus ^pur; Durg, through Power of Attorney Hoidar Ramesh Chandra Verma, S/o Lats Shri Bharat Chandra Verma, sged about 57 years, OccupatiOR-Princlpa!, R/o Lagbsg, Housing Board Coiony, M- 21, Rajnandgaon (C.G.). fendanfe Arvind Shrivastsva, S/'o Late Shri Ambika Prasad, aged abouf 64 years, R/o Qtr.No.L.i.G.-371, Janta Colony, Padmanbhpur, Durg (C.G.). Smt.urmiia Shrlv'astava, W/o Shri An/lnd Shrsyastsva, aged about 62 years, R/o Qtr. No.L.i.G.-371, Janfa 2. (Chhattisgam). (V.'rit Petitlon under Articte 227 of ihe Constitutlon of indla) ir.Atui Pandey, counssi ror the peSitloners. Hon'bie lir. T. s? ORDER (23-11-2011) 1. By thls writ petition under Articie 227 of the Constitution of india the petitioners have chailenged the iegaiity and propriety of the order daied 3.10.2011 passed bythe Second'Ci'v'i! Judge Ciass-i, Durg, in Civii Suit No.77B/2011, whereby the Second Civli Judge Ciass-i has attowsd the , appiication filed by respondsnt No.2, one of sister of the petitioRers/plalntiffe impieadtng oiher sisters as 3 party in evidion suit of BBU "aiaLt -€- the acoommodaiion originaily owned by father of the pstitioners and respondent No.2 and her other sisiers. 2. i have heard iearned counsei for the petitioners, perused the order impugnsd snd other documents fiiea' on behaif of ihe petitioners. 3. On the basis of wili the present peiitloners have fiied suit for eviction, in which they have not impSeaded their other sisiers nameiy, Smt.Sandhya Khare, Sushma BaKshi snd Shobha Shrivasiavs as a party. RespondeRt No.2 Smt.Urmiia Shrivastava, one of sister of the petitioners has objected and chaiienged fsminineness of 'A'iii and has siso fiied appiication for impiesding other sisters as a necessar/ party. 4. in suit for svidion the piaiRtiffs sre required to prove the fact fhat ihsy are ownsrs and iandiord of the property. W!!i has been chslienged by respondent No.2, in these circumstances, at the instance of respondsnt No.2 by aiiowing the appiication for Impieading other sisters as a party the Court beiow has noi committed any illegaiity warraniing interference. 5. Consequently, the writ petitlon is ilable to bs dismissed and it is hsreby dismissed. However, the petitioners are at iiberty to fiie such document sxecuted in behaif of other sisters of the peiifioners showing the fact fhat fhey are not having any interesi or csaim over fhe property on account of wiii', in thsse circumstances, the petitioners are stiii at liberty to flie appropriate appiication for deietion of other sisters as a party. No order as to costs. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge