Back
B.N. AGRAWAL, G.S. SINGHVI, JJ.
Ramesh Chandra Pattnaik - Appellants
Versus
Pushpendra Kumari & Others - Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NO.4755 OF 2008
Decided On: 1-8-2008
Impleadment - Specific Performance Suit - The court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned orders, and dismissed the application for impleadment, holding that the party sought to be impleaded was not a necessary party for the determination of the genuineness of the agreement of sale between the petitioner and the respondent.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a suit for specific performance of an alleged agreement of sale dated 10.4.1977 against Respondent No.1, with a prayer for a decree of permanent injunction. Respondent No.10 filed an application for impleadment, which was granted by the trial court. The petitioner challenged this order through a writ petition and a petition for special leave to appeal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that Respondent No.10 was not a necessary party for the determination of the genuineness of the agreement of sale between the petitioner and Respondent No.1. The appeal was allowed, the impugned orders were set aside, and the application for impleadment was dismissed.
Issues: The main issue was whether Respondent No.10 should be impleaded in the suit for specific performance of the alleged agreement of sale.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that as the suit was filed in 1977 and the only scope of inquiry was the execution of the agreement between the petitioner and Respondent No.1, Respondent No.10 was not a necessary party for the determination of the agreement's genuineness.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the impugned orders were set aside, and the application for impleadment was dismissed. The trial court was directed to make all possible efforts for the early disposal of the suit.
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. In a suit for specific performance of the alleged agreement of sale dated 10.4.1977 instituted by the petitioner against Respondent No.1 with a further prayer for grant of a decree of permanent injunction restraining Respondent Nos.1 to 9 herein from interfering with his possession, trial court allowed the application filed by Respondent No.10 under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and granted her prayer for impleadment as a defendant. The petitioner unsuccessfully challenged the order of the Trial Court by filing writ petition before the Orissa High Court and then preferred petition for special leave to appeal.
3. Notice has been served upon Respondent No.10 but she has not appeared either in-person or through an advocate to contest the prayer made in the appeal.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and Respondent Nos.1, 2, 4, 5, 8, and 9.
5. It is not in dispute that the petitioner filed suit in the year 1979 for specific performance of the alleged agreement of sale dated 10.4.1977. In that suit, the only scope of enquiry would be as to whether the said agreement was, in fact, executed between the petitioner and Respondent No.1.
6. Respondent No.10 is alleged to have entered into an agreement with Respondent No.1 on 15.11.1984 for sale of the property, which is the subject matter of the suit filed by the petitioner. In respect of such an agreement, Respondent No.10, could have filed a suit for specific performance but, as stated by learned counsel appearing for the parties, no such suit has been filed. In our opinion respondent No.10 was not at all a necessary party for determination of the genuinness or otherwise of the agreement of sale which is said to have been entered into between the petitioner and Respondent No.1.
7. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed, impugned orders are set aside and the application filed by Respondent No.10 for impleadment is dismissed.
8. As the suit was filed in the year 1977, the Trial Court shall make all possible efforts for its disposal as early as possible.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
