RAJENDRA PRASAD GARG Vs. ASHOK KUMAR PANSARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has impugned the order dated 21.10.2009 whereby the learned trial Court dismissed the application under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 of CPC.

(2.) Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the relevant material on record, it is noticed that two plots Nos.26 and 37 situated in Rajendra Nagar, Jaipur are in dispute. The petitioner-plaintiff has come before the Court with the averment that these plots are in their power and possession whereas the respondent-defendant, in contra, has claimed both these plots of his own. The respondent-defendant also submitted before the learned trial Court that he raised the construction on these two plots which are in his possession. It has emerged on record that both these plots have been allotted by the registered housing society which is required to be regularized by JDA under the provisions of law. It has also emerged that both these plots have yet not been regularized by JDA or any other authority.

(3.) Now in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the crucial question springing for consideration in the instant writ petition is as to whether the JDA is a necessary or a proper party in this case?