// 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9754/2006 Ramesh Sharma S/o Shri Chhagan Lal Sharma and Another Versus Madan Lal S/o Shri Nand Ram Fanan and Others Date of Order ::: 25.07.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri Jai Prakash Gupta, Counsel for petitioners Shri D.K. Garg and Shri Rajesh Mootha, Counsel for respondents #### By the Court:- Admit. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The present writ petition, on behalf of the plaintiffs, is directed against the order dated 9th November, 2006, passed by the trial court, whereby the application under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 CPC, filed on behalf of the respondent No.1 Madan Lal, has been allowed and he has been ordered to be impleaded as defendant in the suit. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the plaintiff was allotted a disputed piece of land by the Municipal Council, which was wrongly cancelled without // 2 // notice to him, therefore, he filed a suit against the Municipal Council. He contended that no relief was sought against the applicant/respondent No.1 Madan Lal, therefore, he was not a necessary party in the suit and the trial court wrongly allowed the application of Madan Lal for impleading him as a defendant, therefore, the order of the lower court is liable to be set-aside. The learned counsel for the respondent No.1 contended that the land, in dispute, is in his possession and was wrongly allotted by the Municipal Council to the plaintiff and, on his objections, the same has now been cancelled, therefore, he is very much interested and affected party in the case but without impleading him as a party in the suit the present suit was filed, therefore, he moved an application immediately on coming to know about pendency of the suit. The trial court rightly allowed his application. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and also examined the impugned order passed by the trial court. It appears from the impugned order that applicant/respondent No.1 Madan Lal is a // 3 // necessary party in the present suit. After considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the reasons assigned by the trial court for impleading Madan Lal as party, are absolutely justified in the facts and circumstances of the present case. The order passed by the learned trial court is absolutely legal and justified. I do not find any illegality, perversity or jurisdictional error in it so as to interfere with the same. There is no merit in this writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman//