Hon’ble Sanjay Misra, J.—This is a civil revision filed under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code against the judgment and order dated 18.3.2008 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mathura on an application under Order 1 Rule 10, CPC in Original Suit No. 834 of 2005, Rajeev Kumar Agarwal v. Nagar Palika Parishad, Mathura.

2. One Sri Ravi Krishna Agarwal filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10, CPC for being made a party in the suit. He stated that the Nagar Palika Parishad had settled an auction in his favour on 15.12.2005 regarding lease of the roof of the shop in question and possession of the same was given to him on 9.1.2006 on his payment of the entire auctioned amount. He also stated that pursuant to the said auction and possession he has made his construction on the roof of the shop in question and the status-quo order dated 19.1.2006 obtained by the plaintiff from the High Court was never served upon him. For the first time he came to know about the status-quo order of the High Court when contempt notice was received by him on 2.8.2006. According to him, there was no order of status-quo or restraint on the date when the roof of the shop was auctioned and