1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 5389/2009. Arun Ramraoji Mahalle and others ...vrs.. Ramchandra Tukaramji Helode and another 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. DATED : FEBRUARY 18, 2010. Heard Shri K.N. Dadhe, learned counsel for petitioners and Shri N.G. Jetha, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2. The Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division, Warud has on 05.08.2009 allowed application of defendants and directed the petitioner / plaintiff to join owners from Gut No.70 and other gut numbers till his field Gut No.52 as party defendants in the suit, after noticing that the petitioner / plaintiff was claiming right of way. Plaintiff then filed another application vide Exh.20 and contended that as joinder of these persons is going to take some time, his application for temporary injunction may first to be decided. That application was rejected on 06.08.2009. Thereafter petitioner / plaintiff moved third application vide Exh.25 and sought review of the order dated 05.08.2009, that application has been rejected on 08.09.2009. 2 Shri Dadhe, learned counsel argues that contents of plaint are specific and those field owners who obstructed the petitioner / plaintiff in user of way have been added as party defendants. There is no cause of action against others. Shri Jetha, learned counsel for respondents on the other hand contends that as suit is for declaration of way the adjoining owners whose field are situated on said way are necessary parties. It is apparent that if necessary parties are not joined, the suit of petitioner / plaintiff will be ultimately dismissed. Petitioner / plaintiff has pointed out his grievance against the defendants and has also specified his cause of action in respect thereof. The dispute is about obstruction in user of way and hence persons who allegedly obstructed are only joined as parties. The impugned directions therefore cannot be sustained. The order dated 05.08.2009 passed below Exh.16 is accordingly quashed and set aside. In view of this, all subsequent orders which are only consequential also fall to ground and are accordingly set aside. Writ Petition is allowed. Rule accordingly, with no order as to cost. JUDGE Rgd.