Rajasthan High Court
Trilochan Singh S/O Shri Janak ... vs Rashid S/O Ruda ... on 13 February, 2023
Bench: Ganesh Ram Meena
[2023/RJJP/002629]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20809/2019
1. Trilochan Singh S/o Shri Janak Singh, Aged About 44
Years, R/o Village Mubarikpur, Tehsil Ramgarh, District
Alwar.
2. Gurvinder Singh S/o Darshan Singh, R/o Village
Mubarikpur, Tehsil Ramgarh, District Alwar.
3. Sukhdev Singh S/o Shri Beant Singh, R/o Village
Mubarikpur, Tehsil Ramgarh, District Alwar.
4. Raghuveer Singh S/o Shri Variyam Singh, R/o Village
Mubarikpur, Tehsil Ramgarh, District Alwar, In Person And
On Behalf Of Villagers Of Mubarikpur, Tehsil Ramgarh,
District Alwar.
----Petitioners/Plaintiffs
Versus
1. Rashid S/o Ruda, R/o Village Mubarikpur, Tehsil
Ramgarh, District Alwar.
2. Shyodan S/o Rustam, R/o Village Mubarikpur, Tehsil
Ramgarh, District Alwar.
3. Juhru S/o Hasnu, R/o Village Mubarikpur, Tehsil
Ramgarh, District Alwar.
4. Fatti S/o Bashir Kha, R/o Village Mubarikpur, Tehsil
Ramgarh, District Alwar.
5. Mahamuda Alias Menu S/o Juhru, R/o Village Mubarikpur,
Tehsil Ramgarh, District Alwar.
6. Kursed S/o Kale Kha, R/o Village Mubarikpur, Tehsil
Ramgarh, District Alwar.
7. Ayub Kha S/o Ammu, R/o Village Mubarikpur, Tehsil
Ramgarh, District Alwar.
8. Hamid S/o Rungta, R/o Village Mubarikpur, Tehsil
Ramgarh, District Alwar.
9. Arsad S/o Sohrab, R/o Village Mubarikpur, Tehsil
Ramgarh, District Alwar.
...Respondents/defendants
[2023/RJJP/002629] (2 of 4) [CW-20809/2019]
10. Chief Executive Officer, Rajasthan Board Of Muslim Wakf,
Jaipur.
----Respondent/applicant
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gajendra Singh Rathore
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA
Judgment / Order
13/02/2023
Instant petition has been preferred by the
petitioners /plaintiffs assailing the order dated 21.09.2019
passed by the Court of Civil Judge & Judicial Magistrate,
Ramgarh, District Alwar on an application filed by the
respondent/applicant No.10- Rajasthan Board of Muslim
Wakf, Jaipur, under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for impleadment as
a party respondent.
Counsel for the petitioners submits that the
respondent/applicant No.10 is neither a necessary nor
effected party even then the learned court below has allowed
the application for impleadment.
The respondent /applicant No.10 while submitting
the application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC before the learned
court below stated that the property in question is the
property of Rajasthan Board of Muslim Wakf, Jaipur, which is
published in the Gazette Notification in the year 1965 at
[2023/RJJP/002629] (3 of 4) [CW-20809/2019]
Gazette No.451. The learned court below after considering
the contents of the application, reply to the application and
the provision of law, allowed the application filed by the
respondent /applicant No.10 for impleadment.
In support of his submissions, counsel appearing
for the petitioners has placed reliance upon the judgment
delivered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case
Sudhamayee Pattnaik and Ors. v. Bibhu Prasad Sahoor
and Ors., reported in AIR 2022 SC 4304. Counsel submits
that no-one can be added as a party to the suit without
wishes of the plaintiff.
Having considered the contents of the application
filed under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, reply to the application as
well as the provision of law, this Court finds that the
respondent /applicant No.10 is the necessary and effected
party. Therefore, the learned court below has not committed
any error in passing the order under challenge.
In the facts of the case, the order of the Hon'ble
Apex Court delivered in the case of Sudhamayee Pattnaik
(supra) is not applicable to the facts of the present case.
In view of the above, no interference is called for
by this Court in the impugned order dated 21.09.2019 passed
by the court below.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
[2023/RJJP/002629] (4 of 4) [CW-20809/2019]
Since the main petition has been dismissed, the
stay application also stands dismissed.
(GANESH RAM MEENA),J
Sharma NK/38
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
