' KHALID MAHMOOD, J.---Sarban Textile Mills Ltd., petitioner has filed this revision petition under section 115 C.P.C. Against the order dated 9-10-2009, whereby learned Civil Judge-I Haripur impleaded Messrs Ados Pakistan as defendant but no order for grant of status quo anti have been passed in spite of clear violation of status quo granted by the Honourable Court.
2. Petitioner instituted a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the respondents regarding property fully described in the .Heading of the plaint. During pendency of suit defendants illegally allotted the plot in favour of Messrs Ados on 31-7-2008 and they moved an application for impleadment but the suit was adjourned sine die. Thereafter Messrs Ados moved a petition for impleadment before the High Court, which was accepted subject to just and legal objections. The learned lower Court vide order dated 22-10-2009 allowed the application of Messrs Ados Pakistan for impleadment.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner argued that Messrs Ados is neither a necessary nor proper party to the suit and its impledment is against law, hence, impugned impleadment order is liable to be set aside.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents opposed the contentions of petitioner and supported the impugned order.
5. Arguments heard and record perused.
6. Admittedly, during pendency of suit defendant allotted the Plot No.42 whether legally or illegally in favour of Messrs Ados on 31-7-2008 and the decision of suit shall have direct bearing on the rights of the Messrs Ados and the law on the subject does not preclude the transferee from being made a party to the pending proceedings. Order I Rules 2 and 10 C.P.C. Provide:- "Parties to suits. (2) Who may be joined as defendants. All persons may be joined as defendants against whom any right to relief in respect of or arising out of the same act or transaction or series of acts or transactions is alleged to exist; whether jointly, severally or in the alternative, where, if separate suits were brought against such persons, any common question of law or fact would arise.
10(2) Court may strike our or add parties. The Court ,may at any stage of the proceedings, either upon or without the application of either party, and on- such terms as may appear to the Court to be just, order that the name of any party improperly joined, whether as plaintiff or defendant, be struck out, and that the name of any person who ought to have been joined, whether as plaintiff or defendant, or whose presence before the court may be necessary in order to enable the Court effectually and completely to adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the suit, be added."
7. Learned trial Court has impleaded Messrs Ados on the basis of allotment of suit plot. As per version of petitioner plot is allotted during pendency of the present suit, hence, said allotment is hit by the principle of lispendis and is illegal. It is admitted fact that the suit plot is allotted either legal or illegal manner but once discretion has been used by the trial Court for determination of right of respondent/allottee by exercising power under Order 1, Rule 10, C.P.C. And record of allotment has been brought on record, the propriety and justice demands that let the rights of the parties be determined by giving a chance to respondent to protect his rights before the trial Court.
8. Learned counsel for petitioner failed to point out any iilegally or irregularity in the impugned order and, as such, it is maintained.
9. Consequently, this revision petition being bereft of merit is hereby dismissed. However, the trial Court is directed to decide the case within six months. No order as to costs.