Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
B.P.ROUTRAY
Abhishweta @ Abhisweta Mishra – Appellant
Versus
Ashok Kumar Mishra – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of the partition suit and intervention request. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. court's reasoning regarding intervention applications. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. legal principles on coparcenary and inheritance. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. criteria for determining necessary parties in partition suits. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. court's decision affirming necessary party status for petitioner. (Para 12 , 13) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. A.P. Bose, learned counsel for the Petitioners, Mr. L. Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party no.1 and Mr. B.C. Panda, learned counsel for opposite party no.2.
3. The suit was filed by present opposite party no.1 praying for partition and other consequential reliefs where opposite parties 2 to 6 are the defendants. The common ancestor of the suit property is one Dasarathi Mishra who is father of the plaintiff and defendants.
5. The learned trial court rejected the prayer of the petitioner for intervention on the assumption that she being the daughter of the plaintiff will derive her share through the plaintiff and therefore, is not a necessary party to the suit.
“24. We may now give some illustrations regarding exercise of discretion under the said sub-rule.
24.2 If the owner
The inclusion of all necessary parties in a partition suit is critical for effective adjudication, recognizing the rights of female heirs under the Hindu Succession Act.
Impleadment of Intervenor – Major daughter of plaintiff is a necessary party in a suit for partition of ancestral property.
A partition suit is non-maintainable if necessary parties, such as co-sharers, are not included, as effective decrees cannot be passed without their presence.
Partition – Decree - When Apex Court held final decree is always required to be in conformity with preliminary decree but that does not mean that preliminary decree before final decree is passed cann....
There is no legal embargo against addition of any new party after a preliminary decree in suit for partition has been passed because suit for partition is disposed of only when final decree is passed....
Impleadment of a person with vested rights in ancestral property as a necessary party under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC.
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
