2025 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 17422
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
NUPUR BHATI
RAJESH KUMAR INANI – Appellant
Versus
INANI EDUCATION AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE – Respondent
CW / 12244 / 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:35733]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12244/2025 Rajesh Kumar Inani S/o Late Nand Lal Inani, Aged About 59 Years, R/o Inani Residency, Bhilwara Road, Chittorgarh.
----Petitioner Versus
1. Inani Education And Research Institute, Through It's Chairman Govind Gopal S/o Goverdhan Lal, R/o- 8, Chitrakut Bypass Road, Old Riico Industrial Area, Chittorgarh.
2. Ramesh Inani S/o Khyali Lal Inani, R/o- 32-A, Kumbha Nagar, Chittorgarh.
3. Anil Inani S/o Ramesh Inani, R/o- 32-A, Kumbha Nagar, Chittorgarh.
4. Murali Manohar Inani S/o Ramesh Inani, R/o- 32-A, Kumbha Nagar, Chittorgarh.
5. Smt. Seema W/o Anil Inani, R/o- 32-A, Kumbha Nagar, Chittorgarh.
6. Smt. Preeti W/o Murali Inani, R/o- 32-A, Kumbha Nagar, Chittorgarh.
7. Smt. Sarla W/o Ramesh Inani, R/o- 32-A, Kumbha Nagar, Chittorgarh.
8. Smt. Renu Inani W/o Prahlad Ray Moondra, R/o- 11-C, Ramkunj, Samarpit Complex, Near Talent Academy, Pula, Udaipur.
9. Smt. Seema W/o Vaibhav Somani, R/o- 5, Somani Bhawan, Shiv Marg, Bani Park, Jaipur.
10. Smt. Shweta W/o Anish Maheshwari, R/o- 17, Raghukool Pratap Nagar, Dadawadi, Kota.
11. Smt. Kavita W/o Sunil Badada, R/o 14, Rajshree Colony, Bohra Ganesh Ji Gali No.- 3, Girva, Udaipur.
12. Smt. Nisha Maheshwari D/o Ramesh Inani, R/o- 32-A, Kumbha Nagar, Chittorgarh.
----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. RS Mankad HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Order
11/08/2025
1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers:-
“1) That by an appropriate writ, order and direction the writ petition may kindly be allowed and the application filed by the petitioner (Annexure-4) may kindly be allowed and impugned order dated 13.02.2025 (Annexure-06) may kindly be quashed and set aside.
2) That any other appropriate writ or order or direction, which is favorable to the petitioner in the facts and circumstances of the case, may kindly be granted to the petitioner.”
2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent No.1- plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the respondent No.2 to 12 before the learned trial court seeking a declaration and permanent injunction against respondent Nos. 2 to 12 in respect of the society’s affairs and property. The suit, inter alia, challenges the validity of a resolution dated 29.08.2019 and a list of members dated 15.08.2019 as forged and fabricated by respondent No. 2, alleging that he, without authority, expelled certain members, inducted his family members, and attempted to alter the constitution of the society. The plaint avers that in 2004 the society purchased 45 bighas of land at Sainti-Bojunda for establishing “Inani Public School,” and details the changes in the executive committee over the years. It was also alleged that respondent No. 2 misappropriated the society’s registers, fabricated resignations, and manipulated membership records.
2.1. Respondent Nos. 2 to 12 filed their written statement along with a counter-claim, to which respondent No. 1 filed a reply denying the allegations.
2.2. The present petitioner filed an application for impleading him as a party under Order I Rule 10 CPC asserting that he is a founder member and ex-Vice Chairman of respondent No. 1 society and that the society’s property situated in Khasra Nos.
491, 492, 499 and 206 at Senti was purchased by him in his capacity as Vice Chairman through a registered sale deed; and that despite his foundational role and direct involvement in the acquisition of the property, he was deliberately not impleaded in the suit. The petitioner also averred that he came to know of the suit on 09.10.2024 and promptly filed the application.
2.3. Respondent No. 1 opposed the application and denied the averments that under the society’s constitution only the Chairman and Secretary are empowered to sue or defend on behalf of the society and that there is no collusion between the plaintiff and defendants.
2.4. The learned trial cou