IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 335 OF 2008 SHRI. GABRIEL FERNANDES ... Petitioner Versus SHRI. NAGO DHONDO REKDO AND 2 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. D. J. Pangam, Advocate for the Petitioner. Coram:- N. A. BRITTO, J. Date:- 10th July, 2008 P.C.: Heard Shri Vaze, the learned Counsel on behalf of the petitioner, who is the plaintiff in RCS No. 38/2003. 2. Challenge in this Writ Petition is to the order dated 22/12/2007 of the learned Civil Judge Junior Division, by which the Government has been ordered to be added as party defendant on an application filed by the defendants. The plaintiff claims to be in possession of the property surveyed under no.41/1 and so do the defendants. The said property is Government property, as shown on the survey records. An application having been filed by the defendants under Order 1, Rule 10(2), CPC, the said application came to be allowed by the impugned order, as a result of which the Government of Goa has been ordered to be added as a party defendant. 3. The learned Counsel on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner had not sought any relief against the Government and, as such, the Government was not necessary party to the said Civil Suit. Learned Counsel has placed reliance on the decision of this Court in HERBERTSONS LTD. V/S. KISHORE RAJARAM CHHABRIA & ORS. (2000 (3) Bom. C.R. 617), wherein this Court after referring to the decision reported in 73 Bom. L.R. 814 in the case of JIVANLAL DAMODARDAS V/S. NARAYAN has stated that: "(5) A necessary party is, as has been stated in O.1, R.10(2), Civil Procedure Code, itself, a party whose addition is absolutely necessary in order to enable the Court to adjudicate effectually and completely on the matter in controversy between the parties. That has been interpreted, in my opinion rightly, to mean that no decree could be passed in the suit without affecting the rights of the party who is sought to be added and the presence of that party is necessary for an effectual adjudication of the questions involved in the suit. It is only when both those conditions are fulfilled that a party could be said to be a necessary party to a suit." 4. Considering the controversy involved where both the plaintiff and the defendants claim to be in possession of the land which admittedly belongs to the Government, the Government would be a proper party, if not necessary, which would help the Court to effectually and completely decide the questions in controversy. Learned Counsel on behalf of the petitioner submits that in case the Government is added as a party then the question of notice would come up. That is an aspect which was not raised before the learned trial Court nor it is being decided in this petition and the petitioner is always free to raise it at the appropriate stage. The Government, if desires, can also waive the notice. 5. With the above observations, the Writ Petition is dismissed in limine. N. A. BRITTO, J. NH