IMPORTANT POINT
It is not necessary that any relief is sought against a party who is proposed to be impleaded.

Sandeep Sharma, J.—By way of instant application filed under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, prayer has been made on behalf of the applicants-plaintiffs for adding Shri Birbhan Goel as proforma defendant No. 4. Prayer made in the application referred to herein above is opposed by the non-applicants/defendants by way of a detailed reply filed to the application. Applicants-plaintiffs have filed above captioned civil suit for recovery of an amount of Rs. 4,74,32,000/- as balance consideration in terms of agreement dated 21.3.2013. As per agreement dated 21.3.2013, applicants-plaintiffs agreed to transfer their complete equity share of Atul Castings Limited (ACL) having its registered office at Village Dandi Kania, Tehsil Nalagarh, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh in favour of the defendants for a total sale consideration of Rs. 8,51,00,000/-. Since non-applicants/defendants allegedly failed to make complete payment in terms of agreement referred to herein above, suit bearing No. 25 of 2016 titled Ravinder Kumar Bansal and others vs. Pankaj Gupta and others came to be filed for recovery of amount, as has been taken note herein above.

2. Ms. Ambika Kotwal, learned counsel representing the applicants/ plaintiffs contended that while going through the pleadings and documents at the time of framing of issues, it transpired to the counsel for the applicants/plaintiffs that as per Clause 2 (c) of the agreement dated 21.3.2013, one Shri Birbhan Goel is also a beneficiary of the said agreement but inadvertently, that too under bonafide inference of law and facts, he could not be arrayed as a defendant in the suit for recovery on the basis of agreement dated 21.3.2013 and as such he may be ordered to be impleaded as proforma defendant. While inviting attention of this Court to agreement dated 21.3.2013, Ms. Ambika Kotwal, made a serious attempt to persuade this Court to agree with her contention that since Birbhan Goel is beneficiary of the agreement dated 21.3.2013, he being a necessary party for proper and complete adjudication of the matter, deserves to be arrayed as a proforma defendant. In support of aforesaid contention, Ms. Ambika Kotwal, placed reliance upon following judgments to persuade this Court to agree with her contention that it is not necessary that relief should be claimed against a person proposed to be added as party respondent or plaintiff because his/her presence may be otherwise essential for proper adjudication of the case:

(i) Savitri Devi v. District Judge, Gorakpur, AIR 1999 SC 976

(ii) Vidur Impex and Traders Pvt. Ltd. v. Tosh Apartments Pvt. Ltd., AIR 2012 SC 2925

(iii) Chet Ram V/s Brij Lal, Latest HLJ 2015 (HP) Suppl. 616

3. While placing reliance upon the aforesaid judgment, Ms. Kotwal, further argued that the plaintiffs being the dominus litus are otherwise entitled to array anybody as a party because exclusion, if any of the proposed defendant at this stage, would ultimately lead to multiplicity of proceedings, which is against the very object of the provisions contained in Order 1 Rule 10 (2) CPC.

4. Mr. Ramakant Sharma, learned Senior Advocate duly assisted by Mr. Basant Thakur, Advocate, while opposing/refuting aforesaid prayer made on behalf of the applicants-plaintiffs and submissions made by the learned counsel representing the applicants/plaintiffs, vehemently argued that neither Shri Birbhan Goel is a necessary nor a proper party for the adjudication of the lis at hand as such, application deserves to be dismissed. Mr. Ramakant Sharma, learned Senior Advocate, while inviting attention of this court to para-5 of the application filed on behalf of the applicants/plaintiffs contended that since it is an admitted case of the parties that no relief has been claimed against the proposed proforma defendant, as such, prayer made in the instant application deserves to be rejected being devoid of any merit. Apart from above, Mr. Sharma, learned Senior