Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he is son of respondent nos. 2 and 3. Respondent no. 2 has filed a suit against respondent no. 3 for permanent injunction and declaration in respect of the property in dispute. The petitioner moved an impleadment application before the trial court on the ground that the property in dispute is a Hindu undivided family and he is carrying on the business of fabrication since 2000 and both the parties want to dispose of the property. Therefore, he should be made as party. He also placed reliance on averments made in paragraphs-5 & 8 of the plaint wherein it is stated that the petitioner was carrying on the business since 1999 on the property in dispute and he is Karta of the Hindu undivided family. On 31.1.2011 the case was listed before the Lok Adalat and a compromise has been filed between the parties and on the basis of the compromise the suit has been dismissed. The impleadment application of the petitioner is still pending and has not been disposed of and without disposing of the application the order has been passed on 23.1.2011. By the impugned order, the petitioner's right has been substantially effected. The petitioner has no other remedy except to proceed this Court in writ jurisdiction.
Issue notice to respondent nos. 1 and 2, returnable at an early date. The petitioner may take steps to serve the respondents within two weeks.
List in week commencing 2.5.2011.
Till the next date of listing, the operation of order dated 23.1.2011 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division)/ Presiding Officer, Jhansi in original suit no. 118 of 2010 (Dharmdas Birthare Vs. Smt. Shanti Devi Birthare) shall remain stayed and the parties are directed to maintain status quo over the property in dispute.
Order Date :- 16.3.2011 OP