JUDGMENT Manoj Kumar Gupta, J. Heard counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for respondent no. 1 and Sri R.C. Upadhyay for respondent no. 2. 2. In a suit instituted by the petitioner, one Sundar made an application seeking impleadment. It was allowed by the trial court by order dated 15.3.2014. The petitioner preferred a revision against the order of the trial court dated 15.3.2014, but in which Sundar whose impleadment was allowed, was not made a party. The revision has been dismissed by order dated 20.7.2015. Challenging the order of the trial court dated 15.3.2015 and the order of the revisional court dated 20.7.2015, the petitioner has approached this Court invoking its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution. 3. Once the trial court has allowed the application filed by Sundar for impleadment, as a defendant in the suit, Sundar was a necessary party in the revision filed by the petitioner. However, since Sundar was not impleaded in the revision and thus, order of the trial court dated 15.3.2014 became final, as against Sundar. In the instant petition as well Sundar has not been impleaded. 4. In such view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion, that this petition is not maintainable and is accordingly, dismissed.