[2025:RJ-JP:48994] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2566/2025 Ashutosh Vashistha S/o Shri Tej Kumar Viashistha, Aged About 57 Years, Resident Of 2966 Uniyara Rao Ji Ka Rasta, Purani Basti, Jaipur And Plot No. B-17/4, Shiv Marg, Bani Park, Jaipur (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. Tej Kumar Vashistha S/o Late Shri Jagannath Vashistha, Aged About 86 Years, Resident Of 502/501, Onkar Shri Apartment, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur And Vashistha Dental Clinic, First Floor, Dwarkadhish Ji Ma Mandir, Choura Rasta, Jaipur (Raj.) 2. Abhinandan Vashistha S/o Shri Tej Kumar Vashistha, Aged About 56 Years, Resident Of 502/501, Onkar Shri Apartment, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur And Vashistha Dental Clinic, First Floor, Dwarkadhish Ji Ma Mandir, Choura Rasta, Jaipur (Raj.) 3. New Peoples Academy Senior Secondary School, Reg. No. 20/86-87 Through Principal Address- House No. 2966, Third Crossing, Uniyaro Ka Rasta, Chandpole Bazar, Jaipur (Raj.) 4. State Of Rajasthan, Through District Collector, Collectorate Office Building, Banipark, Jaipur (Raj.) 5. Additional District Collector, Mudrank And Panjiyan Bhawan, Collectorate Office, Banipark, Jaipur (Raj.) 6. Bhawani Singh S/o Shri Narpat Singh, Resident Of House No. 2966, Uniyaro Ka Rasta, Third Crossing, Chowkri Purani Basti, Jaipur (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahesh Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Abhi Goyal with Ms. Meenal Bhargava HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN GUPTA Order 02/12/2025 [2025:RJ-JP:48994] (2 of 2) [CW-2566/2025] 1. With the consent of both the parties, the matter is heard finally. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a dominus litis and the suit is simplicitor for permanent injunction. However, since he has not sought any relief of permanent injunction against the applicant-respondent. Therefore, the learned Trial Court has committed illegality in passing the impugned order dated 03.01.2025. 3. He further submits that, if any, decree is passed in the pending suit against the defendant, who was originally impleaded as a party, then the said decree cannot be executed against applicant-respondent, as they will not be bound by such decree. 4. Learned counsel for the defendant submits that, if such decree is not binding upon the applicant-defendant, then the respondent has no grievances, if the writ petition is allowed and he is deleted from the array of parties. 5. Considering the same, the present writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 03.01.2025, is quashed and set aside. 6. It is made clear that, if any, decree is passed in favour of the petitioner, applicant-respondent will not be bound by any such decree. 7. With the above observations, the present Civil Writ Petition stands disposed of. 8. All pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (BIPIN GUPTA),J MAHIMA/61