[2025:RJ-JP:1687] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1428/2020 Mandir Shri Raghav Ji Virajman, Ward No. 15, Raghav Sadan Through Bavilayat Chief Trustee Shri Surendra Bhargava, Aged About 52 Years, S/o Shri Chaturbhuj, R/o Chhabra, District Baran. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Banwarilal Maheshwari S/o Shri Sohanlal Maheshwari, President Bharat Vikas Parishad Sewa Sansthan, Chhabra, Tehsil Chhabra, District Baran, Rajasthan. 2. Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Chhabra. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Mittal for Mr. Arvind Kumar Bhardwaj For Respondent(s) : None HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order 10/01/2025 This civil writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-plaintiff (for short ‘the plaintiff’) against the order dated 25.11.2019 passed by the Senior Civil Judge Chabra, Baran in civil suit No. 70/2007, whereby the application filed by the plaintiff under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC has been dismissed. Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that plaintiff filed a suit against the defendants for permanent and mandatory injunction in which name of the defendant No. 1 was not typed in a sequence. Learned counsel for the plaintiff further submits that the plaintiff filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC but the trial Court vide order dated 25.11.2019 arbitrarily dismissed the [2025:RJ-JP:1687] (2 of 2) [CW-1428/2020] application filed by the plaintiff on the ground that if the application is allowed defendant No. 1 capacity would be changed and nature of the suit would also be changed. So, the order dated 25.11.2019 passed by the trial Court be set aside and the application filed under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC be allowed. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the plaintiff and perused the impugned order. In my considered opinion, trial court had committed an error in dismissing the application filed by the plaintiff because plaintiff wanted to change the sequence in the name of the defendant No. 1. So, nothing would be happened which could effect the nature of the suit. So, petition filed by the plaintiff deserves to be allowed subject to payment of cost of Rs. 2,000/-. Accordingly, the petition filed by the plaintiff is allowed. The order dated 25.11.2019 passed by the trial Court is set aside. Application filed by the plaintiff under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC is allowed. The trial court is directed to take amended cause title filed by the plaintiff on record subject to payment of cost of Rs. 2,000/- by the plaintiff to the defendant(s). Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Tahir/281