IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 23.11.2010 C.R.No.6201 of 2010 Gurudwara Welfare Society ...Petitioner Versus Mohan Singh and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present : Mr. Sandeep Khungar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. O.P.Kamboj, Advocate, for respondent No.1. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral) Challenge in the present revision petition is to an order passed by the learned trial Court on 10.05.2010, whereby an application filed by the present petitioner seeking impleadment in a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 08.08.2005 was dismissed. Mohan Singh, respondent No.1-plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 08.08.2005 against one Sher Singh, who is said to be owner of land measuring 8 Kanals. The petitioner has purportedly entered into an agreement on 21.01.2006 in respect of 1 Kanal of land with Dalip Singh, who is none else but son of Sher Singh. It is the case of the petitioner that land, subject matter of agreement to sell dated 21.01.2006 is also subject matter of agreement to sell dated 08.08.2005. The petitioner has, thus, sought to be impleaded in the suit for specific performance filed by Mohan Singh, though his separate suit for specific performance on the basis of agreement to sell dated 21.01.2006 is already pending. Learned trial Court has declined such application for the C.R.No.6201 of 2010 reason that the petitioner is a stranger to the agreement to sell dated 08.08.2005 and, thus, he cannot be impleaded in a suit for specific performance. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that in reply to the application for impleadment, the stand of the plaintiff was that both the suits for specific performance i.e. arising out of agreements to sell dated 08.08.2005 and 21.01.2006 should be decided together, so as to avoid the possibility of contradictory judgments. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and found that though no case is made out for impleadment of the petitioner in a suit for specific performance filed by Mohan Singh, but since the subject matter of both the suits is partly common, therefore, it will be in the interest of justice, that both the suits are taken up for hearing together, so as to avoid disability of any contradictory judgments. In view of the said fact, Civil Suit No.561 of 2001 titled “Mohan Singh Vs. Sher Singh and others” and civil suit titled “Gurudwara Welfare Society Vs. Dalip Singh”, be heard and decided together by the learned trial Court, may be by separate judgments or by a common judgment, as the Court may deem appropriate. With the said direction, the present revision petition stands disposed of. 23.11.2010 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE 2