Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010032742010 2025:GAU-AS:5439 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No.: CRP/359/2007 SRI DINESH PRASAD DUBEY and ORS S/O LT. RAJ MANGAL DUBEY 2: SMTI SARASWATI DEVI W/O LT. RAJ MONGAL DUBEY. 3: SMTI MUNNI DUBEY D/O LT. RAJ MANGAL DUBEY ALL R/O SATI JAYMATI ROAD ATHGAON P.O. GUWAHATI ASSAM. VERSUS SRI DINDAYAL AGARWAL S/O LT. BAJRANGLAL AGARWAL SATI JAYMATI ROAD ATHGAON P.O. GUWAHATI ASSAM. For the petitioner (s) : Ms. M. D. Choudhury, Advocate For the respondent (s) : XXXX Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH O R D E R 02.05.2025 This is an application filed under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging the order dated 28.08.2006 passed in Title Suit No.179/1998 by the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No.2, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati (for short, ‘the learned Trial Court’) whereby there was a direction given by the learned Trial Court to implead the Trust as well as the Trustees in the said suit. 2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners who were the plaintiffs submitted that the Trust in question is not a necessary party and has nothing to do with the plaintiff No.2, and as such, the order dated 28.08.2006 is required to be interfered with. 3. This Court has also taken note of that the respondent in the instant application, namely, Sri Dindayal Agarwal had expired and on the basis of an order passed by this Court on 02.05.2014, his legal representatives had been substituted. 4. This Court further takes note of that the plaintiffs being dominus litis to the suit have liberty to implead or not to implead a party to the said suit. It is observed that if the plaintiffs do not Page No.# 3/3 implead a necessary parties or even a party who is essential for the adjudication of the said dispute, the plaintiffs do so at its peril. 5. Considering the fact that the petitioners herein who were the plaintiffs have assailed the order dated 28.08.2006, this Court is of the opinion that there is no requirement for interfering with the said order impugned in the instant proceedings. However, it is observed that the plaintiffs would be at liberty to implead the Trust as well as its Trustees. It is further observed that at the Trial of the suit, the learned Trial Court shall decide whether the Trust as well as the Trustees are necessary parties by framing an issue. The learned Trial Court shall decide the same without being influenced by the order dated 28.08.2006. 6. The LCR(s) which have been called for be forthwith return to the learned Trial Court. 7. Taking into account that the petitioners are represented, this Court directs the petitioners to appear before the learned Trial Court on 16.06.2025. 8. The Registry shall ensure that records are received by the learned Trial Court prior to the date so fixed herein above. 9. With the above, the instant petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant