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

2016 Supreme(Ori) 763

A.K.RATH
Nibedita Pradhan – Appellant
Versus
Purna Chandra Sahu – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. B.K. Rath.

JUDGMENT :

Dr. A.K. Rath, J.

This petition challenges the order dated 05.07.2016 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 1st Court, Cuttack in T.S. No. 253 of 1992. By the said order, the learned trial court rejected the application of defendant no.2 (b) under Order 1 Rule 10 C.P.C. to implead one Sumitra Prusty, a stranger to contract.

2. Opposite party no.1 as plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance of contract impleading one Narayan Birabar Samanta as defendant. During pendency of the suit, the defendant died. Thereafter, the legal heirs of defendant were substituted. While the matter stood thus, the defendant no.2(b) filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC to implead one Sumitra Prusty. The same was rejected.

3. The question does arise as to whether the third party in a suit for specific performance of contract, a stranger or third party to contrat is a necessary or proper party ? The subject-matter of dispute is no more res integra.

4. This Court in the case of Manmohan Sahu Vrs. Ashis Kumar Mandal and others, 2016(II) OLR-128, held thus :

“6. This is not a virgin ground in so far as the question is concerned. The subject-matter of dispute is no more re




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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top