[2025:RJ-JP:17845] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4797/2025 Madhu Tilani W/o Shri Ramesh Tilani, R/o Plot No. 17, Tatkaleshwarpuri, Hida Ki Mori Ke Andar, Galta Road, Jaipur- 302001 (Rajasthan) ----Petitioner Versus 1. Smt. Tara Devi W/o Shri Bacchuram Alias Hiralal, R/o Jaipur Nagar, hida Ki Mori Surajpole Bazar, Jaipur. 2. Ms. Elikutti D/o Shri V.k. Wandi, R/o Jaipur Nagar, Mansarovar 30/39/4, Jaipur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vipin Sharma For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 28/04/2025 This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 20.12.2024 passed by Court of learned Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate No.3, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, in C.I.S. No.80/2023, whereby the application under Order 1 Rule 10 C.P.C. filed by the petitioner, was dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has purchased the land in dispute in August, 1992 and she is a owner of the disputed land. Counsel further submits that learned Trial Court did not considered the aforesaid facts and dismissed the application filed on behalf of the petitioner. Therefore, the [2025:RJ-JP:17845] (2 of 2) [CW-4797/2025] present writ petition may be allowed and petitioner be impleaded as a party-plaintiff. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner & gone through the impugned order and the other material available on record. Perusal of the impugned order reveals that in the original suit, plaintiff/respondent No.1, namely Tara Devi has clearly stated that she had verbally given the disputed property on rent to the respondent No.2 on 01.06.1993, whereas the petitioner, namely Madhu Tilani, has stated that the disputed land was purchased from Tara Devi in August, 1992. The Learned Trial Court, after considering all the facts, has passed a reasoned order, which is just & proper. No illegality, infirmity or error has been committed by the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid order. Hence, there is no scope for interference in the aforesaid order under the limited writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Consequently, the present writ petition is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J SAURABH /18