Back
SANDEEP N. BHATT
Shirishkumar Rameshchandra Parikh – Appellant
Versus
Kishoreben Jagatkishor Purohit – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The present petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the order impugned passed below Exh.36 dated 04.11.2022 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vadodara in Special Civil Suit No.175 of 2018, by which, the trial Court has refused to add the petitioner as party plaintiff to the said suit. The said suit is filed by the plaintiff - respondent No.2 herein and the defendant – respondent No.1 herein for specific performance.
2. The facts of the present case are as under :
2.1 The plaintiff – an administrator of Shri Acharya Mahaprabhuji Ni Bethak Temple viz., Shri Vrajeshkumar Vrajbhushanlalji Maharaj Shri, Vadodara has filed the suit against the defendant - Smt. Kishoriben Jagatkishor Purohit for specific performance of an agreement to sell, which is executed for an immovable property for the consideration of Rs.6 lakhs. The said agreement to sell is notarised one and not the registered document.
2.2 During the pendency of the suit, the deed of assignment is executed by the original plaintiff in favour of the present petitioner. Therefore, the present petitioner has filed an application below Exh.36 for impleading the party plaintiff in the said suit.
2.3 After considering
The need to strictly adhere to the provisions of law in civil proceedings and the limited scope of exercising powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the discretionary power to add parties under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure should be exercised to ensure the effective adjudi....
A subsequent transferee with a registered sale deed must be allowed to protect her interests in ongoing litigation, demonstrating both necessity and direct interest in the subject matter.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the impleadment of a party is not necessary if no legal right has been created in their favor, and their presence is not required to effective....
Court cannot allow adjudication of collateral matters so as to convert a suit for specific performance of contract for sale into a complicated suit for title between the plaintiff/appellant.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in determining the necessity of adding parties to the su....
The court upheld the trial court's decision to deny the petitioners' application to join the suit, emphasizing the necessity of parties and the principle of dominus litis in civil proceedings.
The court affirmed that a plaintiff's right to join parties (dominus litis) is subject to judicial discretion, and a proposed party must be necessary for a complete adjudication of the suit.
The High Court's supervisory powers under Article 227 are limited to ensuring subordinate courts act within their authority, and it cannot interfere without evidence of jurisdictional abuse.
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
