HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (227) No.1409 0f 2011 (Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of indie) Mr.Awadh Tripathi, counsei for the petitioner. MrManoj Paranjape, counsel for respondents No.1 to 4. None present for respondents No.5 and 6. Mr.Sumit Jhanwar, Panel Lawyer for respondent No.7lState. Petitioner Smt.Salma Sheikh W/o Asad Rizvi, Defendant aged about 44 years. Occupation— Advocate, District and Sessions Court, Ambikapur (C.G.) Versus Respcndents 1. Nishar Ahmad Sio Late Mohammad Plaintiffs lsha. aged about 49 years. Occupation-Government Service. 2. Mushtaqe Ahmad Slo Late Mohammad lsha. aged about 44 years, Occupation-Government Service. . 3. Irshad Ahmad Slo Late Mohammad Isha, aged about 41. years, Occupation—Business. 4. Sakii Ahmad Sic Late'Mohammad Isha, aged about 38 years, Occupation-Govemment Service. AH are permanent resident of MohaHa Nawapara. P.S.-Tahsii Post-Suraipur. Distt.Surguja (08.) 5. Asad Rizvi Slo A.M.Rizvi, aged about 44 years. Occupation-Govt.$ervice 6. Aii Akhatar Rizvi $lc A.S.Rizvi, aged about 34 years‘ Occupation-Advocate District and Sessions Court, Ambikapur (C.G.) Resident No. 5 and 5 R/o. Kedarpur Bhatti Road Ambikapur, Distt.-Sarguja (C.G.) 7. State of C.G. Through Coliector Surguja. Ambikapur, Distt.Surguja (C.G.) “2‘ (SB: Hon’ble Mr. T.P. Sharma, J.) ORDER {ORAH (1 1 -7-2o1 1) . By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of lndia the petitioner has chai!enged the legaiity and propriety of the order dated 11.2.2011 passed by the 4‘“ Additional District Judge (F.T.C.), Ambikapur in Civil Suit No.18A108, whereby the Court below while deciding the issue relating to miejoinder of party has directed respondents No,1 t0 4 for impleading previous seller MP. Holicross Sisters Association Ambikapur as a party for proper and complete adjudication of the dispute. . l have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the order’impugned and other documents tiled on behalf of the petitioner. ; . As per order impugned, the Court below has directed to implead the previous owner as a necessary party for proper and complete adjudication of the dispute. . This is not a dispute between party relating to previous ownership or claim of previous owner. Previous owner was neither necessary party nor proper party forjust decision of the case. Even otherwise by not impleading previous owner in case of any necessity the plaintiff has not made it to a party. .While passing such order the Court below has committed illegality. Consequently, in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction. the petition is allowed. Order dated 11.2.2011 passed by the 4m Additional District Judge F.T.C.), Ambikapur in Civil Suit No.18A/O8 is hereby quashed to the extent of directing respondents No.1 to 4 for impieading the previous owner as a necessary party. No order as to costs. Sd/— T. P. Sharma Judge (