JUDGMENT 1. The present writ petition is directed against the order dated 4.2.2019, passed by the learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge No. 3, Bhilwara (hereinafter referred to as the trial Court) vide which an application dated 27.4.2018 filed by the plaintiff under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking to implead daugthers of Gagandas, Smt. Nirmla, Smt. Sheela and Smt. Jaya has been allowed. 2. Briefly stated the facts relevant for the present purposes are that the plaintiff-respondent No. 1 instituted a suit for partition of the ancestral property, inter alia asserting that the plaintiffs father Gagandas was having ownership-possession of the ancestral property situated in Sindhu Nagar, Bhilwara. 3. During the pendency of aforesaid suit, the plaintiff filed an application dated 27.4.2018 under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure and sought impleadment of his sisters being daughters of Gagandas. 4. The trial Court allowed the aforesaid application filed by the plaintiff, vide its order dated 4.2.2019 and impleaded the sisters as defendants in the suit as defendants Nos. 7 to 9. 5. Impugning the order dated 4.2.2019, the petitioners- defendants have preferred the present writ petition. 6. Mr. Jain learned counsel for the petitioner narrating the facts relating to the proceedings of the case submitted that since the plaintiff had himself relied upon a Will, vide which his father had bequeathed the property amongst his 3 sons, while excluding his daughters from the property, the sisters impleadment was unwarranted and contrary to pleadings of the parties. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record. 8. It cannot be disputed that in an ancestral property, daughters do have a right of inheritance. Thus, their impleadment is imperative, rather necessary. The trial Court has rightly allowed the impleadment of the sisters - defendants Nos. 7 to 9. I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the order impugned warranting interference under extra ordinary supervisory jurisdiction. 9. The writ petition has no substance and the same is, therefore, dismissed. 10. The stay application No. 3407/2019 is disposed of accordingly.