IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 4807 of 2010 Date of decision: May 27, 2011 M/s Ashoka Enclave III Welfare Association (Regd.) .. Petitioner Vs. M/s Greater Ashoka Land and Development Company Pvt. Ltd. and others .. Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Kulbhushan Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. Sukhdeep S. Sandhu, Advocate for respondents No.2 & 3. *** A.N. Jindal, J This revision petition has arisen out of the order dated 18.5.2010 (Annexure P.6) passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Faridabad, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 CPC for impleading it as defendant has been dismissed. The petitioner is a Resident Welfare Association of the locality called Ashoka Enclave Part-III situated in Sector 35, Faridabad. The President of the association is one of the occupants of the Ashoka Enclave Part-III, Faridabad. There is a monument called Kos Minar situated in the vicinity of Sector 35, Fridabad which was declared as protected vide notification No.18069 dated 21.10.1918 and confirmed by notification No.6798 dated 11.3.1919. The area of Kos Minar is comprised of Khasra No.51/4/2 and the area around this Kos Minar is declared as park. The respondent No.1 having obtained the licence to declare a colony known as Ashoka Enclave Part III by concealing the fact that the protected monument was existing in Khasra No.51/4/2, has tried to demolish the monument to develop the colony. Having come to know, the Ministry of Archaeology & Tourism and Archaeological Survey of India wrote a letter to the Director, Town and Country Planning, Haryana, Chandigarh not to allow any kind of construction within 100 meters from the protected limits of monument. A Civil Revision No. 4807 of 2010 -2- copy of the letter dated 28.1.2005 has been placed with the petition. The petitioner Association sought permission to develop a park around the Kos Minar which was allowed vide letter dated 27.12.2001 and when the association started developing the park, the respondent No.1 without impleading the petitioner association as party, filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction wherein the the petitioner moved an application for impleading as party to the suit as their rights were being affected. The application was contested by the respondent No.1 and ultimately the trial court declined the application. Arguments heard. Record perused. The dispute pertains to Khasra No.51/4/2 wherein a monument in the name of Kos Minar is situated and the documents reveal that the petitioner association are the occupants of the Ashoka Enclave Part III. The petitioner was well within its rights to develop the park after seeking permission from the respondents No.2 and 3. Now by way of suit the respondent No.1 has sought declaration claiming ownership and possession over the suit property which includes the Kos Minar. The park is to be completed around the Kos Minar which is a protected area under the supervision of the Archaeological Survey of India. If the ambiance of the monument is disturbed and construction is raised over the said area petitioner-association would certainly suffer an irreparable loss and a set back to its legitimate rights, therefore, in these circumstances, the petitioner- association is also necessary party. If the application of the petitioner is allowed and they are permitted to contest the suit then the respondent No.1 would not be prejudiced in any manner. After all, the respondent No.1 is to establish its rights over the property. Resultantly, interference by this Court has become essential. As such, this petition is accepted, impugned order dated 18.5.2010 is set aside and the application filed by the petitioner under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC is allowed. May 27, 2011 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge