2025:JHHC:27801 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No. 100 of 2024 Budhu Oraon, S/o Late Baha Oraon @ Charwa Oraon, R/o Village Saparom, P.O. & P.S. Nagari, District Ranchi, Jharkhand ..... .... Petitioner Versus 1. Prabhu Oraon son of Late Mangara Oraon. 2. Budhuwa Oraon son of Sri Prabhu Oraon. Both are residents of Village Chipra, Bobro, P.O. Chipra, P.S. Nagri, District Ranchi. 3. Lakhana Oraon son of Late Chunda Oraon, resident of Village Saparom, P.O. and P.S. Nagari, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 4. Baliram Kujur son of Kastu Kujur, resident of Village Saparom, P.O. and P.S. Nagari, District Ranchi, Jharkhand. 5. Narendra Kumar Oraon son of Sri Bandhana Oraon, resident of Village Naro, P.O. and P.S. Nagri, District Ranchi. 6. The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, having its office at Kuchhari Chowk, P.O. GPO Ranchi, P.S. Kotwali, District Ranchi. … …. Opposite Parties CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. P.K. Mukhopadhyay, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sachin Kumar, AC to SC-I ------ Order No. 05 / Dated : 11.09.2025. 1. The instant civil miscellaneous petition has been filed under Article 227 of the constitution of India for quashing the order dated 21.08.2023 passed in M.C.A. No. 198 of 2023 arising out of Original Suit No.256 of 2019 by which the petition under Order 1 Rule 8A of the CPC has been rejected. The said petition was filed on the ground of non-joinder of necessary party on the plea that he was a necessary party in the suit and the suit was filed without impleading him. Ground of impleadment is that he had the title over the suit property on the basis of judgment and decree passed in Original Tittle suit No. 175 of 2015. 2. Learned Trial Court rejected the petition on the ground that Order 1 Rule 8A of the CPC was with respect to power of Court to permit a person or body of person to present opinion or to take part in the proceeding. 3. Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order for the reason that plea of impleadment under Order 1 Rule 8A of the CPC is altogether different than the plea of impleadment under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC. 2025:JHHC:27801 4. In the present case, a plea of title has been raised for being impleaded under Order 1 Rule 8A of the CPC. It empowers the Court, while trying a suit to allow a person, even if such person is not a party in the suit, to present his or its opinion on a question of law directly and substantially arising in the suit, for that purpose to take such part in the proceedings of the suit as the court may specify. 5. Here the plea of impleadment is altogether on a different ground based on an antecedent title over the property and this cannot be a ground so far Order 1 Rule 8A of CPC is concerned. Therefore, there is no infirmity in the impugned order. Civil Miscellaneous Petition is accordingly dismissed. However, the petitioner will be at liberty to file an appropriate petition for his impleadment in the Trial Court under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of. (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Pawan/ -