IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 7082 of 2009 Date of Decision: 09.09.2010 Municipal Council, Nabha .... Petitioner Versus Nand Lal and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present : Mr. Arvind Mittal, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. G.P.S. Bal, Advocate for respondent No. 1 Mr. Vishal Aggarwal, Advocate for respondents No. 2 to 4 ALOK SINGH, J. (ORAL) Present petition is filed challenging orders dated 17.8.2009 passed by Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Nabha whereby application moved by the Municipality (petitioner herein) under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC seeking impleadment was rejected. Respondent No. 1 herein filed suit against defendant- respondents No. 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 for permanent injunction restraining defendants No. 1 and 2 for raising any sort of construction over the encroached street/public lane and further directing defendants Nos. 3 and 4 to do all the needful acts to remove the said encroachment and construction raised on the public street. Undisputedly within the municipality limit public street/public lane vests in municipality and right to manage public street/public lane is always with the municipality. In view of the reliefs claimed in the plaint, petitioner-municipality seems to be necessary and proper party. C.R. No. 7082 of 2009 2 Learned counsel for the respondents fairly stated that petitioner can be directed to be impleaded as one of the defendant, however, learned trial Court be directed to decide all the pleas being raised before the trial Court about the effect of the earlier decision passed in the previous suit. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, impugned order is quashed. Petitioner is permitted to be impleaded as one of the defendant. Petitioner newly impleaded defendant shall file written statement within 30 days from today before the trial Court. Parties shall be at liberty to raise all the pleas available to them under the law. (ALOK SINGH) 09.09.2010 JUDGE reena