Petitioner challenged a lower court order impleading the respondent under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC. The High Court found the lower court was correct in requiring the respondent's presence and dismissed the writ petition.
The writ petition was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16508/2018
Jado Singh Son Of Karan Singh, Aged 50 Years, Resident of Kota Patti Town Weir, Tehsil Weir, District Bharatpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
Ramji Lal Son of Basanta, Resident Of Kotapatti Nayabas, Weir, Tehsil Weir, District Bharatpur.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Dr.Arjun Singh Khangarot, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR
Order
19/09/2022
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 01.05.2018, whereby, application filed by the respondent under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for impleadment as party respondent to the suit, has been allowed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Court below has committed an error in allowing the application of the respondent and as such, this Court is required to interfere in the present matter.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the impugned order does not give any reason, as why, the respondent was necessary party in the suit.
Learned counsel submitted that reference of earlier suit between the parties was also of not much relevance and the Court below ought to have seen, as whether, the petitioner-plaintiff had
(2 of 2)
[CW-16508/2018]
filed suit in proper manner against the party, who was necessary in the suit.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
perused the material available on record.
This Court finds that the Court below, after considering the nature of dispute involved between the parties and further fact of earlier litigation between the parties, found that the respondent was required to be made defendant in the suit.
This Court finds that no error has been committed by the Court below while allowing the application under Order 1 Rule CPC.
This Court accordingly finds no force in the petition and as such, the same is dismissed.
(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR), J
Himanshu Soni/10
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court ought to interfere with the lower court's order allowing the impleadment of a respondent under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC.
Whether the impugned order lacked reasoned application regarding the necessity of the respondent party.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Jado Singh
Ramji Lal
Ashok Kumar Gaur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
