Back
2024 Supreme(Cal) 1420
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
BISWAROOP CHOWDHURY, J.
Swapna Nandi & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Anita Pal & Ors. - Opposite Parties
C.O. No. 1031 of 2022
Decided On : 14-06-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Opposite Party : Mr. Ranjan Kali, Mr. Ashis Kumar Dutta.
IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that a necessary party must be added to a suit to ensure complete and effective adjudication of all relevant issues.
Headnote:
CPC - Partition Suit - Order 1 Rule 10(2) - The court emphasized the necessity of adding parties to ensure complete adjudication of disputes, affirming the trial court's decision to implead a necessary party in a partition suit.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a plaintiff in a partition suit, challenged the trial court's order allowing the addition of a party who claimed ownership of a property involved in the suit, arguing it would complicate proceedings.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the opposite party was a necessary party for effective adjudication, as their property was subject to an injunction and relevant to the suit's outcome, justifying the trial court's decision.
Issues: Whether the trial court erred in allowing the addition of a party to the partition suit and if the opposite party's presence was necessary for proper adjudication.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the CPC, a necessary party must be added to ensure all relevant disputes are resolved, supporting the trial court's decision.
Result: The revisional application is dismissed, affirming the trial court's order to add the opposite party as a necessary party.
JUDGMENT :
Biswaroop Chowdhury, J.
1. The petitioner before this Court is a plaintiff in a Suit for partition and is aggrieved by the order dated 7th December 2021 passed by the Learned 3rd Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Howrah in Title Suit No. 532 of 2021. The Petitioner being aggrieved by the Order dated 7th December 2021 passed by the Learned Court below in impleading opposite Party no.14 in Title Suit No. 532 of 2021 has come up with the instant application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
2. The case of the opposite Party no-14 before the Learned Court below may be summed up thus.
1. The opposite party no-14 having received a letter/notice dated 15-09-2021 send by Sukanta Das of Dakshin Buxarah Polen Para P.O.-Buxarah District Howrah – 711110 have come to know that in the said title suit pending before Learned Court below an order of injunction is passed by the Learned Court on 04.09.2021 and more surprisingly in 25-09-2021 the local Jagacha Police intimated the husband of the petitioner viz. Shri Shivajee Thakur that in view of the said Order of injunction the work being made by the petitioner be stopped and accordingly the petitioner has been compelled to stop the construction work though she holds all the required documents and sanction granted by the Statutory Authority.
2. The opposite party no-14 is the owner of 07 Cottah – 04 Chittaks – 18 sqft of Land at R.S. Dag No-307 by purchase vide two deeds of conveyance dated 12th Day of February 2008, and 13th Day of February 2008 respectively executed by one Smt. Mousumi Polley and the other by one Anath Bandhu Pal. After purchase the Howrah Municipal Corporation has duly amalgamated both the said properties. The DL and LRO, Howrah vide order dated 27-07-2015 has further been pleased to allow the conversion of the said properties ‘Danga to Bastu’ Land. The Land Reforms Authority has provided LR. Khaitan No. 3879 and L.R. Dag No. 437 (of R.S. Dag No. 307) in her name.
3. The Opposite Party no-14 on perusal of the said letter/notice of said Sukanta Das and also upon further enquiry through her husband has come to know that one Smt. Swapna Nandi and 13 others including said Sukanta Das has filed the said Suit against Smt. Anita Pal and 12 others (i.e. legal heirs of deceased Hari Pada Nandi) for partition of the said suit properties alleging that no registered Deed of Partition or Decree of partition has been passed amongst Hari Pada Nandi and Badal Chandra Nandi, ie, the predecessor in interest of Plaintiffs and defendants and as such suit for partition is filed further challenging the partition Deed dated 14-02-1990. It is further learnt that R.S. Plot No. 307 corresponding to L.R. Khaitan No. 3879 involves one of the suit properties which exclusively belongs to this applicant but the applicant owner is left out.
4. The order of injunction is obtained by the plaintiff by suppressing the following facts.
(i) By a Registered Deed of Partition dated 22-02-1925 recorded in Book No.I, Volume No. 21, Pages 88-95, being No 1573 for the year 1925 executed and registered by and between Hari Pada Nandi and Bisnupada Nandi both sons of Late Srimanta Nandi they partitioned all their properties including the purchased property of this petitioner.
(ii) By another Deed of Partition dated 19-05-1954 recorded in Book No. I, Volume No-23 pages 72-77, being No. 1472 for the year 1954, executed by and between Badal Chandra Nandi, Haladhar Nandi and Murari Mohan Nandi, all sons of Bishnupada Nandi they Partitioned their respective joint properties amongst themselves.
(iii) On the other hand by another Deed of Partition dated 14-02-1990 recorded in Book No I, Volume No-16, Pages – 75-89, being No. 629 for the year 1990, the heirs of Hari Pada Nandi effected Partition of their allotted share.
(iv) The predecessor-in-interest of the present plaintiffs viz. Barun Nandi and others filed Title Suit No. 13 of 2008 in the Learned Trial Court against the heirs of Late Hari Pada Nandi for partiti
