CR No. 5806 of 2010 -1- ***** IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CR No. 5806 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision : 09.09.2010 Girdhari Lal .......... Petitioner Versus Major Singh & others Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present : Mr. C.L. Sharma, advocate for the petitioner. **** VINOD K. SHARMA, J. (ORAL) The petitioner has invoked the revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to challenge the order dated 27.5.2010, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Ludhiana, vide which the application moved by the applicant / respondent for being impleaded as party stands allowed. The plaintiff filed a suit against the defendant / respondents, claiming that defendants should not be allowed to represent the Guru Ravi Dass Mandir Parbandhak Sabha, Basti Jodhewal Byepass, Ludhiana. It was pleaded by the applicant / respondents, that during the pendency of the suit, the fresh election was held, and that the applicants were elected as office bearer of the Sabha, therefore, sought to be impleaded as a party. Instead of moving an application CR No. 5806 of 2010 -2- ***** for substitution, application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure was moved, which stands allowed. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended, that the applicants could not be allowed to be impleaded in their individual name. Furthermore, as no relief was claimed against them, they could not be said to be necessary or proper party to the case. I find no force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Once the petitioner impleaded the previous office bearer, as party for effective adjudication of the case, the person now representing Sabha can be said to be necessary /proper party. No fault can be, thus, found with the impugned order to exercise revisional jurisdiction. No merit. Dismissed. 09.09.2010 (VINOD K. SHARMA) 'sp' JUDGE