JUDGMENT :

1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

“It is, therefore, prayed that record of the case no.1/23 titled as Shivjiram Vs Tehsildar and ors pending before Civil Judge Senior Division Nanva, District Nagour may kindly be called for and after examining the same this Hon’ble Court by an appropriate writ, order or direction quash and set aside the order dated 26.04.2023 (Annx-10) and allowed the application filed by the petitioner under Order 1 Rule 10 dated 25.01.2023 (annx-8).

Any other writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court thinks fit in the interest of justice may kindly be passed in favour of petitioner.”

2. Brief facts of the case, as placed before this Court by learned counsel for the petitioner, are that one Radhey Shyam (son of respondent no.1-Shivji Ram Gurjar) alongwith other persons, instituted a suit, against the petitioner & other persons, under Sections 88, 53 & 188 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955, before the Sub Divisional Officer (SDO), Nawa, District Nagaur for partition and injunction, in relation to land (situated in Revenue Village Nawa, District Nagaur) comprising Khasra Nos. 106, 107, and 108 - total admeasuring 2.28 hectares.

2.1. In the aforementioned suit, the respondent no.1 and other persons had claimed, amongst others, that the lands in question were purchased by them, from the respective recorded khatedars thereof, vide registered sale deed dated 04.09.2013. The new khasra nos. 2386/107, 2387/107, 2388/2386, 2389/2386 and 2390/2386 were formulated in respect of the land in question.

2.2. Vide the judgment and decree dated 14.05.2014 passed by the learned SDO, the said suit instituted by the respondent no.1 was decreed.

2.3. The petitioner against the aforesaid judgment and decree dated 14.05.2014 preferred an appeal before the learned Revenue Appellate Authority (RAA), Nagaur. The learned RAA vide the judgment and decree dated 03.09.2021 dismissed the appeal, while holding the judgment and decree passed by the learned SDO. The petitioner thereafter, preferred an appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the learned RAA, before the learned Board of Revenue (BOR) for Rajasthan, Ajmer. The learned BOR vide order dated 27.10.2021, while fixing the next date i.e. 17.12.2021, in the pending appeal, had passed an interim order to the effect of maintaining the status quo with regard to the land in question, till that date.

2.4. During the pendency of aforesaid revenue proceeding, the respondent no.1 filed a suit for permanent injunction before the learned Senior Civil Judge & Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawa City, Tehsil Nawa, District Nagaur, pertaining to the property in question.

2.5. The petitioner came to know about the aforesaid suit then he filed an impleadment application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC. The learned Civil Court below, however, vide the impugned order dated 26.04.2023, rejected the said application, while not considering the petitioner, as a necessary party to the said suit.

2.6. Thus, aggrieved by the said order dated 26.04.2023 passed by the learned Court below on the application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, the present petition has been preferred claiming the afore-quoted reliefs.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the learned Court below, before passing the impugned order, failed to consider that in the suit filed by the respondent no.1 before the learned Court below, he did not mention about pendency of the appeal preferred by the petitioner before learned BOR, wherein the interim order of status quo was passed on 27.10.2021; further, despite the fact that the suit instituted by the respondent no.1 before the learned Court below was pertaining to the land in question, the respondent no.1 deliberately did not implead the petitioner as party defendant therein, even when, as per law, the petitioner was a necessary party, whose impleadment was necessary for fair and