1. - This rule is directed against the order dated December 12, 1980 of the Additional Munsif No. 1, Jodhpur by which he dismissed the petitioner's application filed under Order 1, Rule 10, C.P.C.

2. The plaintiff-non petitioner No. 1, who is the landlord, instituted a suit for arrears of rent and ejectment against defendant-non petitioner No. 2, who is the tenant. The ejectment was sought in respect of shop No. 5 on various grounds. On February 26, 1980, an application was moved on behalf of the petitioner stating that he is a sub-tenant and for completely and effectually determining the questions involved in the suit, his presence is necessary and as such, being a necessary party, he should be impleaded as a party to the suit. The material averments, contained in para 2 of the application, are as under :The learned Additional Munsif held that the petitioner cannot be impleaded as a party against the wishes of the plaintiff and dismissed the petitioner's application under Order 1, Rule 10 C.P.C. The petitioner got the Rule issued praying that his application should be allowed and he should be impleaded as a party to the suit. On behalf of non-petitioner No. 1, Mr. G.R. Sin