[2025:RJ-JP:14655] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15091/2023 1. Usha Devi W/o Shivshankar, R/o Kasba Kumher, Tehsil Kumher, District Bharatpur 2. Bhupendra Kumar S/o Shivshankar, R/o Kasba Kumher, Tehsil Kumher, District Bharatpur 3. Yadendra S/o Shivshankar, R/o Kasba Kumher, Tehsil Kumher, District Bharatpur 4. Devendra Kumar S/o Shivshankar, R/o Kasba Kumher, Tehsil Kumher, District Bharatpur 5. Sushma D/o Shivshankar, R/o Kasba Kumher, Tehsil Kumher, District Bharatpur ----Petitioners Versus 1. Hariom Gupta S/o Shri Murari Lal, R/o Kumher District Bharatpur 2. Vishnu Kumar S/o Murari Lal, R/o Kumher District Bharatpur 3. Gaurav S/o Late Harishankar, R/o Kumher District Bharatpur 4. Ashish S/o Late Harishankar, R/o Kumher District Bharatpur 5. Reena D/o Late Harishankar, R/o Kumher District Bharatpur 6. Seema D/o Late Harishankar, R/o Kumher District Bharatpur 7. Pammi Jain S/o Panna Lal Jain, R/o Shop Of Cloth, Main Market, Below Neema Ka Ped, Kumher, District Bharatpur (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. J. K. Moolchandani, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Dheeraj Singhal, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order [2025:RJ-JP:14655] (2 of 3) [CW-15091/2023] 01/04/2025 This Civil Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioners- plaintiffs against the order dated 10.07.2023 passed by Senior Civil Judge, Kumher, District Bharatpur in Suit No.59/2016, whereby application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC filed by the respondent Nos.1 to 6-applicants (for short’ the applicants’) has been allowed and they have been impleaded as party defendant Nos.2 to 7. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs submits that the plaintiffs filed a suit for eviction against the respondent No.7-defendant (for short ‘the defendant’) in which applicants filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC. Trial court vide order dated 10.07.2023 wrongly allowed the application filed by the applicants. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs also submits that plaintiffs filed the suit on the basis of the Will executed in favour of Shivshankar who is husband and father of the plaintiffs. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs also submits that validity of the Will cannot be agitated in the present suit. If applicants had any grievance regarding Will, they had liberty to file a separate suit. So, the order dated 10.07.2023 passed by the trial court be set aside. Learned counsel for the applicants has opposed the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the plaintiffs and submitted that before filing the eviction suit, plaintiffs had sent a notice to Gaurav who was collecting rent without any authority. Defendant-Gaurav had given reply. Tenant-Pammi Jain in his written statement stated that disputed shop belongs to Murari Lal. So, trial court rightly impleaded the applicants as party defendant. [2025:RJ-JP:14655] (3 of 3) [CW-15091/2023] So, present petition being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the plaintiffs as well as learned counsel for the applicants. It is an admitted position that plaintiffs filed a suit for eviction against the defendant-Pammi Jain but before filing of the suit, they had given notice to Gaurav for allegedly collecting the rent. They had not impleaded the applicants as party defendant. As per contention of the defendant-Pammi Jain in his written statement, disputed shop belongs to Murari Lal. So, in my considered opinion, trial court had not committed any error in impleading the applicants as a party defendant. So, the present petition being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly. Pending application, if any, stand(s) dismissed. (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Jatin /293