CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 – O. I R. 10 – Impleadment of necessary party – Property owner not arrayed as defendant – Interim injunction in demolition dispute – Right of non-party to seek protection of interest – Scope of Supreme Court’s interference under Art.136 – MUNICIPAL LAW – MRTP Act – Unauthorized construction – Demolition proceedings – Appeal against refusal of ad-interim injunction.

advocatemmmohan

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 – O. I R. 10 – Impleadment of necessary party – Property owner not arrayed as defendant – Interim injunction in demolition dispute – Right of non-party to seek protection of interest – Scope of Supreme Court’s interference under Art.136 – MUNICIPAL LAW – MRTP Act – Unauthorized construction – Demolition proceedings – Appeal against refusal of ad-interim injunction.

Original plaintiffs instituted civil suit challenging demolition notice and speaking order issued under Sections 52 and 53 of Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act in respect of alleged unauthorized temple structure and sought injunction restraining demolition – Trial Court refused ex parte ad-interim relief observing that construction was massive unauthorized structure comprising basement, ground and first floors raised without permission – Plaintiffs preferred Appeal From Order before High Court and obtained protection against demolition – Petitioner-Society claiming to be lawful owner of subject property was not party to suit proceedings and filed Special Leave Petition contending that order adversely affected its rights though it had not been impleaded – Petitioner had already moved application under Order I Rule 10 CPC seeking impleadment before Trial Court – Scope of interference.

Held : Where person claiming ownership and direct interest in subject property is not arrayed as party to suit proceedings, proper course is first to seek impleadment before Trial Court under Order I Rule 10 CPC. Unless such person is impleaded and permitted to participate in proceedings, it would be difficult for such person to effectively protect or canvass rights in relation to interim orders passed in suit.

Supreme Court declined to examine merits of demolition dispute or correctness of interim protection granted by High Court at stage when suit itself was at nascent stage and impleadment application of petitioner was pending consideration before Trial Court.

Trial Court directed to expeditiously decide impleadment application within four weeks. Liberty reserved to petitioner that if impleaded as defendant, it would be open to seek modification of impugned order before High Court. Questions regarding maintainability of impleadment application and status of applicant left open for consideration by Trial Court.

Court also took note of submission that plaintiffs themselves had admitted before Trial Court that construction of temple structure had been undertaken without obtaining permission and that Trial Court had initially refused ex parte injunction considering extent of unauthorized construction.

(Paras 3 to 15)

HELD

Person claiming ownership and direct interest in subject property affected by interim orders is entitled to seek impleadment under Order I Rule 10 CPC before appropriate Court. (Paras 7, 10 and 11)

Where impleadment application is pending before Trial Court, Supreme Court may decline to adjudicate merits of interim dispute at threshold stage and instead direct expeditious consideration of impleadment application. (Paras 9 to 12)

After impleadment, affected party may seek appropriate modification of interim order before High Court or competent Court. (Para 13)

Observations made while disposing Special Leave Petition do not conclude rival rights of parties and all issues relating to impleadment and property rights remain open for adjudication by Trial Court. (Paras 12 to 14)

RESULT

Special Leave Petition disposed of directing Trial Court to decide impleadment application under Order I Rule 10 CPC within four weeks. Liberty granted to petitioner to seek modification of impugned order before High Court if impleaded as defendant in suit.