Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010001552023 2026:GAU-AS:2358 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/16/2023 SUDHA JAIN W/O LATE MAHENDRA KUMAR JAIN, A PERMANENT RESIDENT OF 929,KISAN MARG, BARKAT NAGAR, TONK FATAK, JAIPUR, PIN- 302015, RAJASTHAN, INDIA. VERSUS SUJATA SETHI W/O MANIJ KUMAR SETHI, TOKOBARI, NEAR RAILWAY GATE NO. 3, PREM BHAWAN, 1ST FLOOR, SRCB ROAD, FANCY BAZAAR, GUWAHATI, PIN- 781001, KAMRUP (M), ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K R BOROOAH, Advocate for the Respondent : , Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 18.02.2026 1. Heard Mr. K.R. Borooah, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. It appears from the record that despite service of notice, the respondent has not appeared and the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 08.12.2022, passed by the learned Civil Judge No. 3, Kamrup (M), Guwahati in T.S. No. 178/21, rejecting her petition for impleadment. 3. The respondent as plaintiff has filed a suit in the court of Civil Judge No. 3, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati being Title Suit No. 178/2021 for declaration and permanent injunction with respect to an apartment/flat being flat no. 2D, in a multi storied building named Pink Arcade, K.C.Sen Road, Marakhali, Paltan Bazar. One Smti. Neeta Jain @ Nita Jain has been arrayed as the defendant in the said suit. 4. It is submitted that after the death of the petitioner’s husband, she along with her son being the legal heirs of deceased Mahendra Kumar Jain (husband of the petitioner), are necessary parties to the pending suit and the impugned order is therefore erroneous. 5. It appears that a sale deed was executed on 18.12.2014 between M/S Aakarti Construction Pvt. Ltd. and (1) Sri Mahinder Jain (2) Smt. Nita Jain, in respect of the sale of the suit property in favour of the aforesaid persons namely, Sri Mahinder Jain and Smt. Nita Jain. 6. Upon the demise of Sri Mahinder Jain, the legal heirs including the Page No.# 3/4 present petitioner would prima facie step into the shoes of the deceased as far as the ownership of the suit property is concerned and they would therefore have an interest in the said property. 7. It further appears that the suit has been instituted by the plaintiff/respondent seeking enforcement of an oral agreement between the plaintiff and defendant Smt. Nita Jain and it is the reasoning of the learned Court below, while rejecting the impleadment application, that since the present petitioner is not a party to the original agreement, her impleadment would change the character of the suit altogether and it is not legally permissible for the Court to go into question whether the petitioner has acquired any interest in the suit property on the basis of the claim that she is the wife of the original co-purchaser of the suit property. 8. The aforesaid question of the interest acquired by the petitioner herein can be considered only after the present petitioner is impleaded as a party to the suit whereafter she can establish her right, title or interest in the suit property. Since, prima facie on the basis of the aforesaid sale deed, the present petitioner has interest over the suit property and in the event of the suit being decreed in favour of the plaintiff, her interest would naturally suffer, the present petitioner is a necessary party to the suit. 9. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 08.12.2022, passed Misc(J) case No. 506/21 arising of Title Suit No. 178/21, pending before the Court of Civil Judge No. 3, Kamrup (M), Guwahati is set aside and the application for impleadment stands allowed. Page No.# 4/4 10. The present petitioner namely, Sudha Jain, stands impleaded as a defendant in the Title Suit No. 178/21, pending before the Court of Civil Judge No. 3, Kamrup (M), Guwahati. 11. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. Order of stay of further proceedings stand vacated. JUDGE Comparing Assistant