INDIRA CHAURASIA Vs. KRISHI UPAJ MANDI BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The parties are at loggerheads on the question of legality, validity and propriety of the order dated 10.03.2021, whereby the application filed by the petitioner-plaintiff under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC has been rejected.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner has filed a civil suit bearing No. 84A/2015. In the suit it is alleged that the petitioner is owner of survey No. 2467/9/1 min 2 and having way through Krishi Upaj Mandi. The Krishi Upaj Mandi is closing the way which is the easementary right of the petitioner. During pendency of civil suit, vide order dated 8.5.2018 Tehsildar, Tehsil Datia, declared survey No. 2467 as Jungle, on which Krishi Upaj Mandi is situated. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for impleading Forest Department as party respondent. The Forest Department denied the land to be of Forest Department and submitted that only Revenue Department can clarify the situation. On account of that, petitioner moved application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for impleading Government through Collector as party respondent, but the trial Court without deciding the controversy in the matter has rejected the application by the impugned order. Hence, prayed that for effective adjudication of the case and for avoiding multiplicity of the litigation it is necessary that the State Government be impleaded as party respondent.

(3.) Per Contra, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents No.1 to 3 has opposed the petition and has submitted that the present petition is devoid of merits as the property belongs to Krishi Upaj Mandi, Datia. Hence, prayed for rejection of the petition.