MUBASHIR HUSSAIN SHAH, MEMBER-II. --- This order will dispose of the above-captioned revision petition with the following facts gleaned from the record and orders of the lower fora.
2. Brief facts of the case are that Said Kamal, etc. brought a suit for the recovery of share of produce and ejectment against the present petitioners regarding landed property bearing Khasra Nos, 3247, 3264/1 entered into Khasra No, 589/1615, 1617, 1618 as per periodical record of rights for the year 2007-2008 situated at Mauza Bazar Rustam Tehsil and District Mardan for the crops Kharif 2006 to Kharif 2010. Defendants herein were summoned by the Trial Court. The present petitioners/defendants No, 1 to 13 therein and defendants No, 15, 17, 18, 21 and 24 attended the Court and contested the case. The present defendants No, 1 to 13 therein submitted written statement while defendants No, 15, 17, 18, 21 and 24 filed cognovits to the suit. Necessary issues were framed by the Trial Court and evidence of the parties was being recorded but in the meantime, the present respondents/petitioners therein filed an application through attorney Usman Ghani for impleadment of Mir Aftab in the panel of defendants being "Ghair Dakhalkar" whose name was not entered in Fard Jamabandi and Khasra Girdawari though he was in cultivating possession of the suit land paying rent to the defendants. Reply to the aforesaid application was submitted and after hearing arguments by the Trial Court, the said application was accepted as such Mir Aftab was impleaded as defendant. Feeling aggrieved thereby, the present petitioners filed an appeal before the Court of Deputy Commissioner/District Collector Mardan which was dismissed vide the impugned order dated 01.04.2015. The petitioner filed a revision petition before the Additional Commissioner Mardan which was dismissed on 30.03.2016 and hence the instant second revision by the petitioner.
3. Argument in writing perused as submitted by the Counsels for the parties.
4. Petitioners/defendants are aggrieved from the order of impleadment of Mir Aftab on the panel defendants. Under Order 7, Rule 10, C.P.C. the Court has got an ample power to implead a party.
5. Even non-joinder or mis-joinder of a party will not defeat the substantive right of a party, the discretion exercised by the lower Court cannot be interfered in this second revision.
6. There are three concurrent findings of the lower for a against the petitioner which cannot be set aside in this second revision.
7. This being the position, the instant revision devoid of any force is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Revision file be consigned to record room. Copy of this order be sent to all the three Courts below.