Judgment:
WP No.1747.12 Writ Petition No.1747 of 2012 (Jairaj Singh Rathore and another versus Suresh Kumar Saxena and six otheRs.21-03-2013 Shri R.K.Pancholi, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Pratyush Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondents No.1, 2 & 3.
Shri Amit Seth, learned senior counsel for respondent No.7.
Heard.
Order dated 24-11-2011 passed by 14th Additional District Judge, Bhopal in M.J.C.not OT/54/2007, is being assailed vide this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India; whereby, petitioneRs.application under Order 22 Rule 10 and application under Order 11 Rule 10 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 have been dismissed.
Action is brought by respondents No.1 to 5 under section307(5) of the Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 vide M.J.C.not OT/54/2007 in respect of “Kanha Towers”.
constructed on land forming part of KhaSr.No.51 & 52, village Halalpur, Vijaynagar, Lalghati, Bhopal alleging that the same has been constructed unauthorizedly and illegally.
Petitioner who owns certain flats in an adjacent building “Anand Managlam Apartment”.
sought impleadment in the Misc.
Judicial Case.
Trial Court on a finding that the petitioners own flat in adjacent Anand Manglam Apartment are neither necessary not proper party in respect of the action brought against the WP No.1747.12 Construction of “Kanha Towers”.
a separate building than Anand Manglam Apartments, rejected the application.
Trite it is that the basic principle for impleadment in a suit was noted in the decision in Deputy Commissioner v.
Ramkrishna : AIR 195.SC 521.wherein it has been held that for determining whether a person is a necessary party without which no effective relief can be granted two tests are to be satisfied, viz., (i) there must be a right to some relief against such party in respect of matter in the proceeding in question; and (ii) it is not possible to pass an effective decree in absence of such party.
The impugned order when tested on above pronouncement of law does not suffer any infirmity as would warrant an interference.
In the result petition fails and is dismissed.
No costs.
(SANJAY YADAV) JUDGE sc