-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN, JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O R D E R S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2976 of 2010 Bhagirath son of Shri Magan Lal VERSUS Nanu Kha Fakir son of Shri Jeeva Fakir & Others Date of Order :::: March 3rd, 2010 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dalip Singh Mr. B.R. Rana, Counsel for the Plaintiff-petitioner *** By the Court : Heard learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner. Perused the impugned order by which the application filed under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 by the Gram Panchayat for being impleaded as a party on the ground that the suit has been filed collusively against the defendant No.1, who has remained ex-parte and is not contesting the suit and that neither the plaintiff nor the defendant No.1 have any title over the land in dispute, whereas in fact as per the case of the applicant, the land in dispute, which is Khasra No.650 is in the Khatedari of the Gram Panchayat has been allowed. -2- So far as the main contention of the learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner is concerned that the `patta' issued by the Gram Panchayat in favour of the defendant No.1 has been cancelled by the Panchayat Samiti is concerned that is a matter, which would be decided in the trial as to whether or not the land in dispute is in the ownership of the plaintiff or which of the parties have a better title. If the plaintiff is able to succeed on the aforesaid issue the said findings would be binding even on the Gram Panchayat. This would avoid multiplicity of proceedings as well and not leave any room for doubt that the decree obtained by the plaintiff is collusive. In the facts and circumstances, I find no reason to interfere in the writ jurisdiction. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed summarily. (Dalip Singh), J. Ashok/