JUDGMENT

The original petition has been filed challenging an order allowing an impleading application filed by respondents 3 to 6. The suit is for an injunction simplicitor filed by the petitioners against respondents 1 and 2, who are individuals. No relief is sought for against respondents 3 to 6 or against any others. The decree in the suit will not in any manner affect the rights of respondents 3 to 6. The claim of the respondents 3 to 6 is that the Masjid does not belong to the petitioners. For any relief against the petitioners it is always open to respondents 3 to 6 to file an independent suit. There is no necessity to get impleaded in the suit and defend an action which is actually initiated against respondents 1 and 2 alone. The court below has after narrating the contentions of both sides concluded stating that since the 1^st plaintiff is a Masjid numerous persons might be interested in the administration and hence the questions relating to who is in administration of the Masjid can only be decided after adducing evidence. I do not think it is necessary to go into such issues in a suit which is filed by the petitioners for an injunction simplicitor which is a remedy in per