1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7043/2007 {Bodu Versus The Civil Judge (Junior Division) & Others} Date of Order :: 14th July, 2008 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma for the petitioner BY THE COURT: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The respondents no.3 and 4 filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC to implead them as party in the suit for permanent injunction filed by plaintiff – petitioner. The trial court allowed the application vide order dated 22nd August, 2007 (Annexure-3). The said order is under challenge in this writ petition preferred on behalf of plaintiff – petitioner. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the applicants – respondents no. 3 and 4 are neither necessary nor proper party in the suit and the trial court committed an illegality in allowing their application to implead them as party in the suit, therefore, impugned order be set-aside. 2 4. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner in the light of the reasons assigned by the trial court in the impugned order, whereby the application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC has been allowed. The trial court has observed, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, that applicants are necessary party in the facts and circumstances of the case. I do not see any illegality, perversity or jurisdictional error in the said order so as to interfere with the same. There is no merit in this writ petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed in limine. (NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN),J. DK 3