Rekha Dayanand Shinde vs the State of Maharashtra through Superintendent of Police Dharashiv and Others — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Rekha Dayanand Shinde vs the State of Maharashtra through Superintendent of Police Dharashiv and Others — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition allowed; the impugned order dated 01.09.2021 passed below Exhibit-17 in RCS No.311/2021 is quashed and set aside; pending Civil Application No. 11542 of 2025 disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the application filed by Respondent No.1 (Sarpanch) under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC seeking her impleadment in RCS No.311/2021 was maintainable, given that the Gram Panchayat was already a defendant represented through the Gram Sevak and no relief was claimed against the Sarpanch in her personal capacity.

Court's answer

Where a suit is filed against the Gram Panchayat and relief is claimed against it, the Gram Panchayat is duly represented through the Gram Sevak.

Ratio / Principle

Merely because a Sarpanch has been elected after elections, it was not necessary for Respondent No.1 to seek impleadment as a party to the suit against the Gram Panchayat.

Key takeaways

The Plaintiff is dominus litis and cannot be compelled to implead a party against whom no relief is claimed.ratio¶4
In the present case, no relief is claimed against the Sarpanch in her personal capacity.ratio¶4
Since the Gram Panchayat is already a party to the suit, the application filed by Respondent No.1 under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure was not maintainable.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench), single judge (Siddheshwar S. Thombre, J.), 14.01.2026 — Writ Petition No. 10804 of 2021, Samadhan Ajinath Shinde v. Rekha Dayanand Shinde (Respondent No.1, Sarpanch) and Respondents-State. The petition challenged the order dated 01.09.2021 below Exhibit-17 of the 2nd Civil Judge, Junior Division, Paranda (District Osmanabad) in RCS No.311/2021, allowing Respondent No.1's impleadment application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC. The Plaintiff-petitioner had sued the Gram Panchayat for declaration and perpetual injunction, with the Gram Panchayat already impleaded as defendant through the Gram Sevak. Held: a suit filed against the Gram Panchayat with relief claimed against it duly represents the Panchayat through the Gram Sevak; a newly elected Sarpanch need not seek impleadment; the plaintiff is dominus litis and cannot be compelled to implead a party against whom no relief is claimed; no relief was sought against the Sarpanch personally; hence the Order 1 Rule 10 CPC application was not maintainable and the Trial Court committed an apparent error in allowing it. Writ petition allowed; impugned order quashed and set aside; pending Civil Application No. 11542 of 2025 disposed of. No precedents were cited.

2026:BHC-AUG:1351

999-WP-10804-2021.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

999 WRIT PETITION NO. 10804 OF 2021

Samadhan Ajinath Shinde VERSUS

Rekha Dayanand Shinde And Another

Mr. Salgar Suresh Prabhakar, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. K. R. Doke, Advocate for Respondent No.1 Mr. B. A. Shinde, AGP for the Respondents - State

WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11542 OF 2025 IN WP/10804/2021

CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATE : 14.01.2026

PER COURT :

Heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties.

By way of the present petition, the Petitioner assails the order dated 01.09.2021 passed below Exhibit – 17 by the learned 2^nd Civil Judge, Junior Division, Paranda, District Osmanabad, in RCS No.311/2021, whereby the application filed by Respondent No.1 – Sarpanch, under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 came to be allowed.

After hearing the learned Counsel for both the sides, it reveals that the Petitioner, who is the Plaintiff, has filed a suit against the Gram Panchayat seeking reliefs of declaration and perpetual injunction, which is pending for adjudication. On perusal of the title clause of the plaint, it is evident that the Gram Panchayat has already been impleaded as a Defendant through the Gram Sevak. Once the suit is filed against against the Gram Panchayat and relief is claimed

1

999-WP-10804-2021.odt

against it, the Gram Panchayat is duly represented through the Gram Sevak. Merely because, after elections, a Sarpanch has been elected, it was not necessary for Respondent No.1 to seek impleadment as a party to the suit.

The position of law is well settled that the Plaintiff is dominus litis and cannot be compelled to implead a party against whom no relief is claimed. In the present case, no relief is claimed against the Sarpanch in her personal capacity. Since the Gram Panchayat is already a party to the suit, the application filed by Respondent No.1 under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure was not maintainable. The learned Trial Court, therefore, committed an apparent error in allowing the said application.

In view thereof, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 01.09.2021 passed below Exhibit – 17 by the learned 2^nd Civil Judge, Junior Division, Paranda, District Osmanabad, in RCS No.311/2021 is quashed and set aside.

In view disposal of writ petition, pending civil application is also disposed of.

[SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.]

Sameer/January-2026

2