Application in First Appeal Radha Mohan

IN THE HON`BLE HIGH COURT OF MP BENCH AT
GWALIOR
Case No 244/2010 FA
Appellant M/s Harikrishna & Sons
Bhind & others.
Versus
Respondents Surendra Saxena &
others
An application under order 1 Rule 10 CPC for

intervening in the matter
May it please this Hon. Court,
The humble proposed intervener most respectfully

submits this application as under: -
1. That, the present appeal is being filed against the order
dated 10.11.2009 passed by 2nd Additional District Judge
Bhind whereby the suit of plaintiff has been dismissed
and the appeal is pending for kind consideration before
this Hon. Court.
2. That, the proposed intervener is license holder on behalf
of the Indian Oil Corporation and they are running the
Petrol Pump since long time.
3. That, the aforesaid appeal is pending before this Hon.
Court against dismissal of the suit filed by the
appellant/plaintiff.
4. That, in fact both the parties are in collusion with each
other and proposed intervener are in occupation and
physical possession of the land in dispute as well as
Petrol Pump allottee.
5. That, the civil suit has been filed by the
plaintiff/appellant on the strength of agreement to sell it
was executed in between the parties.
6. That, the proposed intervener in physical possession as
well as in occupation therefore, it is necessary party to
implead the proposed intervener in following manner: -
“Radha Mohan Agrawal s/o Late Shri

Harikrishna AgrawaL Occupation Business
R/o Hanuman Bazariya Kila Road Bhind
MP”.
7. That, the proposed intervener is necessary party to the
litigation therefore, in view of the aforesaid it deserves to
be impleaded as party to the litigation.
8. That, earlier litigation was also decided by this Hon.
Court against the proposed intervener in which proposed
intervener had given undertaking to vacate the premises,
but in view of the pending litigation proposed intervener
could not made party, therefore, the proposed intervener
deserves to be impleaded as necessary party to the
litigation.
9. That, the application is based on bona fides of proposed
interned and same deserves to be allowed in the interest
of justice.
PRAYER
It is therefore, most humbly prayed that this
application may kindly be allowed and the proposed
interned may kindly be permitted to be impeladed as
necessary party to the litigation in the interest of justice.
Gwalior
Dated 7/2018 Humble Proposed Intervener
“Radha Mohan Agrawal s/o Late Shri Harikrishna

AgrawaL Occupation Business R/o Hanuman
Bazariya Kila Road Bhind MP”.
Through Counsel
(Anil Mishra & Himanshu Pandey)Advocate

GWALIOR
Case No 244/2010 FA
Bhind & others.
Versus
others
An application under order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC R/w
Section 151 CPC
May it please this Hon. Court,
The humble appellants most respectfully submits this

application as under: -
1. That, the present appeal is being filed against the order dated
10.11.2009 passed by 2nd Additional District Judge Bhind
whereby the suit of plaintiff has been dismissed and the
appeal is pending for kind consideration before this Hon.
Court.
2. That, the suit has wrongly been dismissed by the trial court
without taking into consideration the material as well as
evidence available on record, while the appellants are in

physical and actual possession of the land in dispute,
therefore, it is in the interest of justice respondents deserves
to be restrained not to alienate the appellant from the suit
property till the pendency of the present appeal in the interest
of justice otherwise appellant will suffer irreparably and
purpose for filing this appeal will be ruined.
3. That, the application is based on bona fide of appellant and
same deserves to be allowed in the interest of justice.
PRAYER
Therefore, it is humbly prayed that this application
may kindly be allowed and it is in the interest of justice
respondents deserves to be restrained not to alienate the
appellant from the suit property till the pendency of the
present appeal in the interest of justice.
Gwalior
Dated 7/2018 Humble Appellants
Through Counsel
(Anil Mishra & Himanshu Pandey)Advocate

GWALIOR
Case No 244/2010 FA
Bhind & others.
Versus

others
Affidavit
I, Roopan Lal s/o Harikrishna Agrawal Aged 54 years
Occupation Business R/o Hanuman Bajaria Bhind MP do hereby
solemnly affirm and state on oath as under: -
1. That, I am appellant No.2 in this case and well known

with the facts of the case
2. That, the application under order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC has
been got drafted under my instructions and the contents
of application paragraph are true and correct to my
knowledge. To support of my version I am submitting
this affidavit.
Gwalior
Dated /7/2018 Deponent
Verification
I, the above named deponent do hereby verify and
declare on oath that the contents of this affidavit are
true and correct to my knowledge and that no part of it
is false nor anything is concealed there from.
Gwalior
Dated /7/2018 Deponent

Application in First Appeal Radha Mohan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Application in First Appeal Radha Mohan

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Application in First Appeal Radha Mohan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IN THE HON`BLE HIGH COURT OF MP BENCH AT

Appellant M/s Harikrishna & Sons

Bhind & others.

Respondents Surendra Saxena &

An application under order 1 Rule 10 CPC for

May it please this Hon. Court,

The humble proposed intervener most respectfully

1. That, the present appeal is being filed against the order

dated 10.11.2009 passed by 2nd Additional District Judge

Bhind whereby the suit of plaintiff has been dismissed

and the appeal is pending for kind consideration before

this Hon. Court.

2. That, the proposed intervener is license holder on behalf

of the Indian Oil Corporation and they are running the

Petrol Pump since long time.

3. That, the aforesaid appeal is pending before this Hon.

Court against dismissal of the suit filed by the

other and proposed intervener are in occupation and

physical possession of the land in dispute as well as

Petrol Pump allottee.

5. That, the civil suit has been filed by the

plaintiff/appellant on the strength of agreement to sell it

was executed in between the parties.

6. That, the proposed intervener in physical possession as

well as in occupation therefore, it is necessary party to

implead the proposed intervener in following manner: -

“Radha Mohan Agrawal s/o Late Shri

7. That, the proposed intervener is necessary party to the

litigation therefore, in view of the aforesaid it deserves to

be impleaded as party to the litigation.

8. That, earlier litigation was also decided by this Hon.

Court against the proposed intervener in which proposed

intervener had given undertaking to vacate the premises,

but in view of the pending litigation proposed intervener

could not made party, therefore, the proposed intervener

deserves to be impleaded as necessary party to the

9. That, the application is based on bona fides of proposed

interned and same deserves to be allowed in the interest

It is therefore, most humbly prayed that this

application may kindly be allowed and the proposed

interned may kindly be permitted to be impeladed as

necessary party to the litigation in the interest of justice.

Dated 7/2018 Humble Proposed Intervener

“Radha Mohan Agrawal s/o Late Shri Harikrishna

(Anil Mishra & Himanshu Pandey)Advocate

Appellant M/s Harikrishna & Sons

Bhind & others.

Respondents Surendra Saxena &

An application under order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC R/w

Section 151 CPC

May it please this Hon. Court,

The humble appellants most respectfully submits this

10.11.2009 passed by 2nd Additional District Judge Bhind

whereby the suit of plaintiff has been dismissed and the

appeal is pending for kind consideration before this Hon.

without taking into consideration the material as well as

evidence available on record, while the appellants are in

therefore, it is in the interest of justice respondents deserves

to be restrained not to alienate the appellant from the suit