Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 87 (RAJ)

Doulat Singh Shaktawat v. Narayan Lal

2020-01-08

ARUN BHANSALI

body2020
JUDGMENT Arun Bhansali, J. - This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against order dated 28.08.2019, whereby, the application filed by the petitioner under Order I, Rule 10(2) CPC has been rejected. 2. The respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for permanent and mandatory injunction by impleading the petitioner, who is Secretary of the Gram Panchayat as party defendant. 3. Allegations were made regarding demolition of certain construction un-authorizedly. 4. The application was filed by the petitioner, inter alia, with the submission that he was not a necessary party to the suit and in the alternative it was submitted that the action was undertaken by the petitioner in an official capacity and, therefore, he could not have been impleaded as party respondent and, therefore, his name may be deleted from the array of parties. 5. The application was resisted by the plaintiff. 6. The trial court after hearing the parties came to the conclusion that on account of claims and counter claims at the preliminary stage of the suit, it cannot be decided as to whether the petitioner had any role or not in the incident and, consequently, rejected the application. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the trial court was not justified in rejecting the application filed by the petitioner, inasmuch as, the action, if any, of the petitioner was in official capacity, the trial court could have taken the said aspect in the consideration before rejecting the application and, therefore, the order impugned deserves to be set aside. 8. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the material available on record. 9. The allegations in the plaint are general qua all the defendants including the petitioner and the trial court therefore was justified in coming to the conclusion that at the preliminary stage based on the averments made in the application by the petitioner in relation to his role/capacity cannot be determined. 10. The order cannot be faulted. 11. The writ petition filed by the petitioner has no substance, the same is, therefore, dismissed.