Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
B.P. ROUTRAY
Rajalaxmi Sahu – Appellant
Versus
Tarini Prasad Rath – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual basis for impleadment in civil suit (Para 2 , 3 , 9) |
| 2. arguments on possession and rights of parties (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. principles regarding necessary and proper parties to a suit (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. no infirmity in the trial court's decision (Para 10) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. K.K.Mishra, learned Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr. G.Mishra, learned Senior Counsel for Opposite Parties.
3. The Plaintiff filed the suit praying for a decree for recovery of possession with further prayer against the Defendant to vacate the house and deliver the possession thereof to the Plaintiff. The Defendant filed her written statement contesting the suit. The suit proceeded and presently is at the stage of evidence adduced from the side of the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff has already examined two witnesses on his behalf. At this stage present Petitioner claiming to be in possession of part of the suit house filed a petition under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC praying to add her as Defendant No.2 granting an opportunity to contest in the suit. Said prayer of the Petitioner has been refused by the Trial Court on the ground that the Petitioner is neither a necessary nor a proper party to the su
A party cannot be impleaded in an ongoing suit against the wishes of the plaintiff unless they are deemed a necessary or proper party under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC.
In a suit for permanent injunction, parties can only be added if they are necessary for adjudication; plaintiffs hold the discretion to determine who is included without compulsion to add parties not....
The court emphasized that a necessary or proper party can only be added if it is essential for effective adjudication and not against the wishes of the dominus litis principle.
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 main legal point established in the judgment is that the court has the discretion to determine whether a party is necessary for effective adjudication of the issues involved in the suit, and the ....
A party can be impleaded if their presence is necessary for complete adjudication, affirming the plaintiff's authority in selecting parties to sue.
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.
Implead of party - Suit for permanent injunction against the Government and when admittedly the property belongs to the Government the presence of the petitioner who claims to have purchased the said....
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
