Back
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
Joy Deb Gorai, son of Sri Probodh Gorai – Appellant
Versus
Shambhu Nath Gorai, son of Late Laksmi Narayan Gorai – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, A.C.J.
Prayer:
1. The instant petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 16.02.2023 passed in Misc. Civil Application No. 370 of 2022 corresponding to Original Suit No. 230 of 2022, whereby and whereunder, the petition dated 16.08.2022 filed under Order I Rule 10(2) read with Section 151 of CPC has been allowed.
Facts:
2. The brief facts of the case, required to be referred herein, is as follows:
The petitioner instituted suit for a declaration of right, title and interest and recovery of possession as also for a decree of perpetual injunction stating inter alia that the suit property situated in mouza Kapasara, Mouza No. 255, Khata No. 60, Plot No. 315, Area 6 decimals belong to Prabodh Chandra Gorai, who purchased the aforesaid property vide registered deed of sale being deed no. 11947 dated 14.07.1965.
The said Prabodh Chandra Gorai died leaving behind the plaintiff as legal heir and successor. The part of the aforesaid property has been forcefully occupied by the defendants, as such, notices were issued to the defendants, however, despite service of notice no defendant is appeared in the suit.
During p
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.
The court may compel the addition of necessary parties to a suit despite the plaintiff's choice, ensuring all interested parties can be adjudicated effectively.
The court established that under Order I Rule 10(2) of the C.P.C., a party can be impleaded if they demonstrate a prima facie interest in the property, and the trial court has the discretion to allow....
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 presence of a party whose presence is necessary to determine the real issue in controversy should be permitted in a civil suit. A suit for injunction can include parties whose presence would enab....
A transferee pendente lite is entitled to be impleaded in a suit to protect their interest, and the trial court erred in dismissing the application for impleadment.
A court may exercise discretion to add necessary or proper parties in a suit for effective adjudication, distinguishing necessary parties (essential for decree) from proper parties (important for adj....
The court emphasized that necessary and proper parties must be included for effective adjudication, and the trial court erred in denying the petitioners' impleadment.
The court clarified the criteria for necessary parties under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, emphasizing that a party's independent claim does not warrant inclusion in a suit if it do....
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
