Ravindra Nath Andrik v. Poonem Raghu

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WP227 No. 399 of 2016 • Ravindra Nath Andrik S/o Nangaram Andrik, Aged About 35 Years R/o Cherpal P.S. Bijapur District Bijapur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

• Poonem Raghu S/o Late Poonem Hadma, Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Gangalur, P.S. Gangalur District Bijapur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Petitioner Mr. P.K. Tulsyan, Advocate For Respondent/State Mr. Shashank Thakur, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 4/7/2016

1. Heard finally with the consent of learned counsel for the parties.

2. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order passed by the learned MACT, whereby, while hearing the petitioner's objection to the maintainability of the proceedings on account of non-joiner of the necessary parties, the Tribunal has directed the claimant to implead necessary parties.

3. It is argued that the Tribunal should have dismissed the claim petition instead of requiring the claimant to implead the parties.

4. In the considered opinion of this Court, the learned Tribunal has

not committed any such illegality or irregularity, which warrants exercise of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, because, the impugned order does not prejudice the case of the petitioner.

5. In the matter of Subodh Kumar Gupta and others Vs. Alpana Gupta and others, (2005) 11 SCC 578, it is held by the Supreme Court that when trial Court has exercised judicial discretion to implead proper or necessary parties, interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is not permissible.

6. It is not a case where if the impugned order is allowed to stand, the same will occasion failure of justice.

7. For the foregoing, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- Judge (Prashant Kumar Mishra) Shyna