JUDGMENT Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya, J. By means of this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order of the trial court passed under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC against impleadment of Smt. Niranjana Devi and Smt. Neetu Devi. The petitioner had filed a suit for specific performance against one Bhole Singh. In the said suit Smt. Niranjana Devi and Smt Neetu Devi filed an application for being impleaded on the ground that they are co-sharer of the property in question. The court below by the impugned order allowed them to be impleaded as party against which revision was filed and the revision has also been rejected holding that they are necessary party in the proceedings. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no grievance against Smt. Niranjana Devi and Smt. Neetu Devi as agreement to sell has been executed by one Bholey Singh as such those are not necessary party. Smt. Niranjana Devi and Smt. Neetu Devi are claiming themselves to be the co-sharer of the property in question. In case they are co-sharer, they have vital interest involved in the said suit and any order that is being passed in the said suit for specific performance would affect their right also. As such the court below has rightly impleaded them as party. 3. There is no merit in the writ petition which may merit any further consideration by this Court. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.