IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.3706 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 08, 2007 Gurmej Singh ...........Petitioner Versus Punna Singh and others ..........Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mrs.Justice Sabina Present: Mr.Vipin Mahajan,Advocate,for the petitioner. -- Sabina, J. (oral) C.M. No.15477 CII of 2009 C.M. is allowed. Filing of certified/original copies of Annexures P1 to P6 are exempted. Civil Revision No.3706 of 2009 This revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner praying for setting aside the order dated 2.3.2009(Annexure P6) passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) Gurdaspur vide which the application moved by the petitioner under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure for impleadment as defendant No.3 in the pending civil suit titled `Punna Singh vs. Teja Singh and another' was dismissed. Civil Revision No.3706 of 2009 -2- Petitioner-Gurmej Singh had filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking permission that he may be impleaded as defendant No.3 in the suit filed by Gurmej Singh for separate possession. Vide the impugned order dated 2.3.2009, the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) Gurdaspur has dismissed the said application. Hence, the present revision petition. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that no interference is warranted by this Court. Petitioner in the application has prayed that he may be impleaded as defendant No.3 in the suit on the ground that defendant No.1 had sold the property in dispute to him vide agreement dated 14.8.2007 for a sum of Rs.1,20,000/-. Petitioner after purchasing the said property was in possession of the same as owner. The application filed by the petitioner has been dismissed on the ground that the suit had been filed by the plaintiff-Punna Singh for separate possession of 1/3rd share in the suit property by way of partition. Petitioner had based his case on the basis of agreement dated 14.8.2007. The suit filed by the petitioner on the basis of agreement to sell, Annexure P3, was pending against the petitioner- Punna Singh and defendant No.1 Teja Singh. It was yet to be established in the said suit as to whether defendant No.1 had executed the agreement to sell dated 14.8.2007 in favour of the petitioner or not. The present suit has been filed by the Punna Singh seeking separate possession of his share by way of partition. In case, the petitioner succeeds in establishing that he had purchased the said property from defendant No.1 vide agreement to sell dated 14.8.2007, he would step into Civil Revision No.3706 of 2009 -3- the shoes of defendant No.1. The impugned order does not suffer from any material illegality or irregularity which may warrant interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Dismissed. ( Sabina ) Judge July 08, 2009 arya