Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
Anita Devi W/o Pramod Kumar Jaiswal – Appellant
Versus
Neelam Jaiswal W/o Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual basis for the petition (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. competing arguments regarding petitioner's status (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's assessment of evidence and procedural rules (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. guidelines for impleadment under order 1 rule 10 (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. importance of protecting rights of registered deed holders (Para 11 , 12) |
| 6. analysis of opposing judgments and their relevance (Para 13 , 14) |
| 7. final order allowing the petition (Para 15) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. Sandeep Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Pankaj Srivastava, learned counsel for the O.P. No.1 and Mr. Bhaiya Biswajeet Kumar, learned counsel for the O.P. No.2.
2. This petition has been filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India for quashing of order dated 21.03.2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)-II, Sahebganj in Original Suit No. 23 of 2018 whereby the petition filed by the petitioner under Order I Rule 10(2) C.P.C. for impleadment as party defendant in the said suit, has been rejected.
3. Mr. Sandeep Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the plaintiff/O.P. No.1 filed Original Suit No. 23 of 2018 against the defendant praying there a decree directing the def
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....
A transferee pendente lite is entitled to be impleaded in specific performance suits to protect their interests, validating the need for comprehensive adjudication of rights over the property.
Agreement to Sell – There is no absolute proposition that whenever a suit for specific performance is filed, no third person can be impleaded as party to suit – In order to avoid multiplicity of proc....
The court ruled that third parties may be necessary in specific performance suits to avoid multiplicity of litigation, allowing their impleadment and amendment of the suit.
The decision to allow subsequent purchasers as parties in specific performance suits is justified when they demonstrate a semblance of title or interest to the property, supporting effective judicial....
Order 1 Rule 10 CPC casts duty upon court to ensure impleadment and deletion of party, which may or may not be necessary for adjudication of case.
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.
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
