IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1775 of 2008 Rakesh Son of Late Lalta Prasad, Resident of Village-Shyampur, Post Office- Satyanarayan, Pargana- Parwadun, Tehsil- Rishikesh, District Dehradun. … Petitioner. Versus Bharat Ji Maharaj Birjman Bharat Mandir Rishikesh, District- Dehradun and three others … Respondents. Mr. N.S.Negi, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Dinesh Gahtori, Advocate, learned counsel for the respondents No. 1 and 2. Date May 14, 2010. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. By means of this writ petition, the pettioner has sought the following relief:- A. To set aside the order dated 11-09-2008 filed as Annexure No. 5 passed by the learned Additional District Judge/Fast Track Court-I, Dehradun on application No. 12C in Original Suit No. 30 of 2006 Gyan Kishor and another Vs. Bharat Ji Maharaj Birajman Bharat Mandir Rishikesh and another. B. Issue an order or direction to the respondents to allow the application No. 12C filed by the petitioner under Order 1, Rule 10(2) C.P.C. in Original Suit NO. 30 of 2006 Gyan Kishor and another Vs. Bharat Ji Maharaj Birajman Bharat Mandir Rishikesh and another. C. Issue any suitable order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. D. Award the cost of the writ petition to the petitioner. A perusal of the record shows that the Original Suit No. 30 of 2006 has been filed under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure before the court below and the impugned order dated 11- 9-2008 has been passed by the Additional District Judge, I F.T.C. Dehradun on the application of the petitioner (paper no. 12-C), 2 moved under Order 1, Rule 10(2) C.P.C., in Original Suit No. 30 of 2006, whereby the court concerned has rejected the application on the ground that the petitioner is not a proper or necessary party for the adjudication of the controversy involved in the suit. A statutory remedy of filing a revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is available to the petitioner against the impugned order, therefore, on the ground of alternate remedy, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. On the ground of alternate remedy of filing revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the writ petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner may prefer a revision against the impugned order within a period of three months from today before the appropriate Forum, if so advised. (B.S.Verma, J.) JM