1. C.M.A. No,6042 of 2004 MRS. QAISER IQBAL, J.--- By this order, I propose to dispose of an application under Order I, rule 10(2) for impleading Kamran Waheed and Roshan Ali in the array of defendant for effectual and complete adjudication of question involved in the suit.
2. Mr. Arshad Iqbal, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff has contended that during the transaction between the parties in respect of the house situated at Phase-V, D.H.A. Karachi, the proposed defendant Kamran Waheed had issued a receipt for sum of Rs,1,00,000, allegedly paid by the plaintiff to the defendant on 11-11-2003, drawn on Allied Bank Ltd., Fortress Stadium, Branch Lahore. It is next urged that proposed intervenor Roshan Ali had issued the receipt dated 14-12- 2003 being intermediary between the parties, in connection with the sale of the subject bungalow, therefore, both of them are necessary parties for the purpose of adjudication of all material facts involved in the case.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the defendant has controverted the above position contended that factually no agreement was concluded between the parties nor defendant had proceeded to make payment as alleged in the plaint towards part payment of sale consideration, as the defendant was residing in Canada, at the time of the alleged sale, for the purpose of obtaining B- Lease certain formalities such as completion of the plan was required to be obtained from the Clifton Cantonment Board, for which the plaintiff had offered the services to the defendant, on account of the close contact with the official of the Cantonment Board and D.H.A. unfortunately, the plaintiff has pleaded to enter into a sale agreement with the defendant and proceeded to file suit for declaration and specific performance, alternatively for compensation and damages against the defendant.
4. I have considered the arguments advanced at bar.
5. The scope of Order I, rule 10(2), C.P.C. provided in order to enable the Court effectually and completely, to adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the suit a party can be added. It is spelled out from the contents of the plaint that the case of the plaintiff is based upon the Annexures "A" and "B" filed along with plaint, in order to prove part payment made to the defendant through the proposed intervenors, Kamran Waheed and Roshan Ali. In a suit for specific performance, the proposed intervenor does not seem to be necessary party, or even, proper party because the plaintiff would be at liberty to summon them as witnesses at the stage, when evidence shall be recorded.
6. In any view of the matter, the proposed intervenors did not enjoy any status out of the alleged sale agreement between the parties, it is yet to be determined, whether there existed any sale agreement in between the parties, no cause of action has been shown by the plaintiff against the proposed intervenors, therefore, they are neither necessary nor proper party to be impleaded in the suit.
7. In this view of the matter C.M.A. No,6042 of 2004 is hereby dismissed.
8. The plaintiff has filed issues, copy thereof has been supplied to the other side. Learned counsel appearing for the defendant also undertakes to file issues within seven days. The matter is adjourned to a date in office.