IMPLEADEMENT APPLICATION FORMAT UNDER ORDER 1 RULE 10 CPC
(IMPLEADEMENT APPLICATION FORMAT UNDER ORDER 1 RULE 10 CPC )
IN THE COURT OF LD. CIVIL JUDGE, CENTRAL DISTRICT, TIS HAZARI, NEW DELHI
IA No. XX/XXXX
IN
CIVIL SUIT XX/XXXX
IN THE MATTER OF:
GABBAR SINGH ……………..PLAINTIFF
VS.
VEERU ……………..DEFENDANT
APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF JAY S/O THAKUR BALDEO SINGH R/O XXXX UNDER ORDER 1 RULE 10 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 FOR IMPLEADENT
MOST HUMBLY SHOWETH:
- That the captioned suit is pending before this Hon’ble Court and fixed for xx/xx/xxxx.
- That Applicant is brother of the defendant and is co-owner in the property bearing no. xx at xxxx which is subject matter of the captioned suit. That being a co-owner of property-in-question, the applicant is a necessary party in the matter despite the same the Applicant has not been made a party in the captioned matter.
- That the captioned suit has been filed by Plaintiff for possession of property bearing no. xx at xxxx. The said property originally belonged to Thakur Baldeo Singh. Thakur Baldeo Singh died intestate leaving behind two sons Veeru and the Applicant. As yet property left by Thakur Baldeo Singh has not been partitioned, as such land belonging to the Veeru cannot be identified. In any case Veeru can be owner of only one half of property as per provisions of Hindu Succession Act, 1956, but the suit has been filed for possession of around three fourth of the land.
- That the Applicant is a necessary party as the Applicant is co-owner of the said property. Veeru could not have sold the said property without consent of the Applicant. No such consent has been taken from the Applicant before selling of the said property.
- That Defendant had drinking habit from childhood. With ulterior motives , the Plaintiff befriended the Defendant. Every evening the Plaintiff and the Defendant used to drink together. One evening when Defendant was drunk and was in unsound mind, Plaintiff fraudulently executed sale agreement. Next day when Plaintiff requested Defendant to go the office of Registrar for registration of fraudulently executed sale agreement, Defendant refused that he had executed any such agreement.
- That the sale agreement shows the consideration price of the property in question of Rs. 100 per acre while the market rate in the areas is around Rs. 1,00,00,000 per acre. No person in sound mind can sell property at such throwaway price.
- That Sale Agreement has been fraudulently executed. Further sale agreement has no validity and the same has not been registered as per provisions of Registration Act.
- That Applicant is a necessary party as such impleadment of Applicant is essential for proper adjudication of the matter.
- That Application will suffer irreparable injury and gravely prejudiced if the Applicant is not made a party in the instant suit.
PRAYER
In light of facts and circumstances of the case it is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:
(i) implead the Applicant as Defendant No. 2 in the captioned suit.
(ii) Pass any other order (s) /direction (s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper.
APPLICANT
THROUGH
ADVOCATE
DATE:
PLACE:
Note: The Application for impleadment has to be accompanied with Affidavit.
___________________________________________________
Mukesh Kumar Suman is an advocate and legal author based at Delhi. He regularly appears before various Judicial Forums including NCLT, NCLAT, High Courts and the Supreme Court. He can be approached at mukesh_suman@outlook.com or +91 9717864570.