SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Cal) 1709

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
KRISHNA RAO, J.
Sukhlal Chandanmull (P) Ltd. – Plaintiff
Versus
Harrow Hall – Defendant
GA No. 7 of 2022 In CS No. 364 of 2014
Decided On : 12-02-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Plaintiff : Mr. Sabyasachi Choudhury, Sr. Adv., Mr. Neelesh Choudhury, Mr. Biswanath Chatterjee, Ms. Anuradha Poddar, Mr. Shounak Mukhopadhyay.
For the Defendant : Mr. Dhruba Ghosh, Sr. Adv., Mr. Rohit Banerjee, Mr. Altamash Alim, Mr. Satwik Beriwala.

An applicant seeking to be added as a party must demonstrate direct interest in the subject matter of the suit; failure to do so results in dismissal.

Headnote:(A) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 10 - Application to add a party - Applicant sought to be added as defendant in a suit concerning tenancy rights - Court found that the applicant did not have direct interest in the suit property and was not a necessary party for proper adjudication - The judgments cited by the applicant were deemed inapplicable to the case at hand. (Paras 20-21)

Facts of the case:
The applicant, as the niece and sole legal heir of the deceased tenant, sought to be added as a defendant in a suit for eviction concerning the property where a school was operated. The applicant claimed direct interest in the suit property based on her inheritance.

Findings of Court:
The court concluded that the applicant lacked direct interest in the suit property and was not necessary for the adjudication of the case, leading to the dismissal of the application.

Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant had a direct interest in the suit property to warrant her addition as a party to the suit.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the applicant's claims did not establish a direct interest in the property, and thus her addition as a party was not justified under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Result: Application dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

Krishna Rao, J.

1. The defendant has filed the present application being G.A. No. 7 of 2022 in C.S. No. 364 of 2014 under Order VII, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for rejection of plaint on the ground that the plaintiff has filed the suit against the Society, namely, Harrow Hall, through its Secretary but has not disclosed name of the Secretary.

2. Mr. Dhruba Ghosh, Learned Senior Advocate representing the defendant submits that the suit has neither been filed against the name of the President, nor the Secretary or any of the office bearers authorized by the Governing Body.

3. Mr. Ghosh submits that every suit by or against a Society, must be filed either in the name or against the name of the President, the Secretary or any office bearers authorized by the Governing Body. He submits that as per Section 19 of the West Bengal Societies Registration Act, 1961, every Society may sue or may be sued in the name of the President, the Secretary or any office bearers authorized by the Governing Body.

4. Mr. Ghosh submits that the defendant Society is a registered Society under the West Bengal Societies Registration Act, 1961 but the name of the Secretary is not mentioned in the cause title of the plaint. He submits that the plaintiff is aware that Mr. Sugata Chakraborty is the Secretary of the defendant Society as the plaintiff has exchanged several correspondences with him but has not named the Secretary of the Society in the cause tittle.

5. Mr. Ghosh in support of his submissions relied upon the judgment in the case of Sha-San Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Thakur Corner Byabsayee Kalyan Samity & Ors. reported in 2010 SCC OnLine Cal 1784 and submitted that neither the name of President nor the name of Secretary has been mentioned in the cause title of the plaint nor the name of any other authorized member was mentioned in the body of the plaint, as such the presentation of plaint itself is defective.

6. Mr. Ghosh relied upon the judgment in the case of Illachi Devi (Dead) By Lrs. & Others Vs. Jain Society, Protection of Orphans India & Others reported in (2003) 8 SCC 413 and submitted that the society registered under the Societies Registration Act as contradistinguished from a company registered under the Companies Act cannot sue or sued in its own name.

7. Mr. Ghosh relied upon the judgment in the case of 12, I.C. Bose Road Tenants’ Association vs. Collector of Howrah & Ors. reported in AIR 1977 Cal 437 and submitted that the defendant is a registered Society under the West Bengal Societies Registration Act, 1961. Under Sub-Section (1) of Section 19 of the said Act every Society may sue or may be sued in the name of the President, the Secretary, or any office bearer authorized by the Governing Body in this Behalf. In view of Section 19(1), the Society itself has no locus standi to maintain an action.

8. Mr. Ghosh relied the judgment in the case of National Council of YMCA’s of India vs. Skipper Textiles Private Ltd. reported in 2009 SCC OnLine Cal 909 and submitted that Section 19 of the West Bengal Societies Registration Act, 1961 specifically provides for suits and proceedings by and against the Society being maintained in the name of its president, Secretary and any office bearer authorized by the governing body.

9. Mr. Sabyasachi Choudhury, Learned Senior Advocate representing the plaintiff submits that the plaintiff has filed the suit against the Society through its Secretary and in the cause title of the plaint, the description of the defendant is mentioned through its Secretary and it is not necessary to file the suit in the name of the Secretary of the Society.

10. Mr. Choudhury submits that if the case is filed in the name of the Secretary, every time when the Secretary or the President of the Society is change, the plaintiff has to amend the cause title of the suit on every occasion.

11. Mr. Choudhury submits that the plaintiff has made the Society as defendant represented through its Secretary and thus it

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top