1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 4310 OF 2010 (Shri Vinod N. Upate vs. Shri Dilip T. Nahate & Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. NOVEMBER 18, 2010. Heard Shri Bargat, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Bhuibhar, learned counsel for respondent No. 1. Nobody appears for Respondents No. 2 & 3, though they are served with notice for final disposal. Shri Bargat, learned counsel states that the petitioner wanted to intervene in Regular Civil Suit No. 42 of 2009 filed by present Respondent No. 1 and for that purpose moved application under Order 1, Rule 8A and (3) of Civil Procedure Code, for impleading him as defendant. According to him, Respondents No. 2 & 3 initiated action against Respondent No. 1 for removal of encroachment upon his complaint but then instead of contesting the suit, gave no objection for grant of temporary injunction. Because of that no objection, the status quo is prevailing and encroachment continues. According to learned counsel, the petitioner and villagers will loose the public way if the encroachment continues. Shri Bhuibhar, learned counsel states that the trial Court has correctly applied its mind and there is no 2 jurisdictional error. The facts show that action was initiated upon a complaint of the petitioner and the petitioner has stated that on public way Respondent No. 1 has made encroachment and grabbed the public land. Gram Panchayat issued notice to him after passing requisite resolution but then in suit it appears that Gram Panchayat has not opposed the claim for grant of interim relief. In this situation, prima facie, there appears to be some substance in allegation of collusion between Gram Panchayat and Respondent No.1. In the interest of fair trial, it is necessary to permit the petitioner to participate in Regular Civil Suit as defendant. His application moved for said purpose on 20.07.2009 is, therefore, granted. The Respondent No.1 shall implead the petitioner as defendant No. 3 in that suit and shall permit him to file his written statement and thereafter shall proceed further with the trial of the Suit in accordance with law. The impugned order dated 22.04.2010 passed below Exh. 19 in Regular Civil Suit No. 42 of 2009 is accordingly quashed and set aside. Application at Exh. 19 is granted. Writ Petition is disposed of. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.