' TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.---Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment, dated 21-5-2003 whereby Civil Revision No,836 of 2003, filed by the petitioner was dismissed in limine.
2. Facts briefly are that the petitioner moved an application under Order I, Rule 10, C.P.C. Seeking his impleadment as a party in a suit for specific performance titled as "Sanaullah v. Rashid Ahmed and others". It was his case that he purchased land measuring 4 Marlas out of the disputed property through a registered sale-deed on 4-1-1984, on the basis of record of rights pertaining to the years 1966-1967 wherein the number of the property was given as Khewat No,18, Khatuni Nos. 69 to 70.
However, according to the learned counsel these numbers were changed subsequently.
3. Wehave considered the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the documents appended with this petition. We have noticed that subsequent to the record of rights pertaining to the years 1966-1967 different Khewat Numbers had been given in the record of rights pertaining to the year, 1966-67, 198081 and 1984-85. We fail to understand how the petitioner in the years 1984-85 claimed any right in Khewat No,36 Khatuni Nos. 190-191 when in fact the purchased land was in Khewat No,18. Learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to point out that Khewat No,18 of his sale-deed had any nexus with Khewat No,36 of the disputed land. He has also failed to point out any illegality, misreading or non-reading in the impugned judgment warranting interference by this Court.
4. Resultantly, for what has been stated above, the instant petition being devoid of any force, is hereby dismissed. Leave to appeal is refused.