- (1.) THIS writ petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the impugned order dtd.2.7.2011 passed in Civil Suit No.33/2011 � Satpal V/s State of Rajasthan and ors. in which the learned trial Court has rejected the application of the plaintiff under Section 151 C.P.C. refusing to modify the order dtd.28.5.2011 on the ground that if the plaintiff was aggrieved by the alleged non-compliance of the said order by the defendant � Irrigation Department Authorities, they could file application under Order 39 Rule 2A C.P.C.
(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sushil Kumar Bishnoi submitted that the respondents � defendants could not have restored the status-quo ante as it existed on 26.5.2011 in utter breach of order dtd.28.5.2011 passed by the Court directing status quo and therefore, the order dtd.28.5.2011 required modification and the learned trial Court has erred in rejecting the application of the plaintiff under section 151 C.P.C. filed for this purpose. On the other hand, Mr. L.K. Purohit learned counsel for the respondent � defendant urged that in reply to the writ petition, they have stated in para 6 that the part of the land in question was sold to one Smt. Indra Devi W/O Daulat Ram measuring 2.08 bighas in the same chak in which irrigation facility was being provided to present plaintiff � petitioner Satpal also and on her request, water turn was provided in her field also considering these facts on 26.5.2011 prior to passing of status quo order on 28.5.2011. The plaintiff had approached this Court without impleading the said purchaser Smt. Indra Devi and obtained the exparte stay on 28.5.2011. He, therefore, submitted that without her impleadment as defendant, the respective rights of the parties cannot be properly adjudicated. He further submitted that the order dtd.28.5.2011 of the trial Court would operate only prospectively and cannot operate retrospectively and since water outlet was changed to 26.5.2011 itself, prior to the passing of order dtd.28.5.2011, the learned court below was justified in rejecting the application under Section 151 C.P.C as the order dtd.28.5.2011 could not be modified to give any retrospective benefit to the plaintiff. No rejoinder to the said reply specifically rebutting the averments made in para 6 has been filed by the plaintiff petitioner before this Court. Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and having perused the impugned order, this Court is of the opinion that the learned trial court was justified in rejecting the application under Section 151 C.P.C. by the impugned order dtd.2.7.2011 since the order dtd.28.5.2011 could not be given retrospective effect. In the circumstances of the case, the plaintiff is also directed to implead Smt. Indra Devi W/O Daulat Ram the purchaser as defendant in the suit and the learned trial Court may proceed accordingly further with the trial. If the impleadment application is not made by the plaintiff before the learned trial Court within a period of four weeks from today, the suit shall stand dismissed. The writ petition is accordingly found to be devoid of merit and the same is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court forthwith.;