Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
AJAY MOHAN GOEL
Hema Surin Alias Guddan Surin AB – Appellant
Versus
Balbir Singh Bindra – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background: suit challenging will; defendants transposed as plaintiffs. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments: order 23 r1a inapplicable; common interest justifies transposition. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. hp amendment adds order 1 r10(6) for party transposition. (Para 8 , 10) |
| 4. petition lacks merit; order upheld, petition dismissed. (Para 9 , 15) |
| 5. transposition valid under order 1 r10(6) to avoid multiplicity. (Para 11 , 14) |
| 6. order 23 r1a limited to withdrawal/adjustment of suits. (Para 12 , 13) |
JUDGMENT :
Ajay Mohan Goel, J.
By way of this petition, the petitioners have assailed order 21.02.2025 (Annexure P-5), in terms whereof, an application filed by defendants No.4 and 5 therein for being transposed as plaintiffs has been allowed.
2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that plaintiff, namely Balbir Bindra has filed a suit for declaration that the plaintiff and defendants except defendant No.2 be declared joint owners of the suit property and the alleged Will dated 01.07.2020, registered in the Office of Sub-Registrar is illegal, wrong and void. Other reliefs have also been prayed for in the Civil Suit.
3. The plaintiff has impleaded five
Local amendment to Order 1 Rule 10 empowers courts to transpose defendants as plaintiffs at any stage; Order 23 Rule 1A limited to withdrawal/adjustment of suits, inapplicable otherwise.
Transposition application under Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC rejected at belated stage post-written statement and evidence closure due to lack of diligence, inconsistent adversarial stand, and suspected ex....
Transposition of a defendant as a plaintiff under CPC requires the original plaintiff to withdraw or abandon the suit, ensuring no multiplicity of proceedings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of commonality of interest for transposition under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, the implications of Order 41 Rule 22 and Rule 33 CPC, and t....
A transposed plaintiff cannot change the entire cause of action; a fresh suit must be filed for new claims.
Transposition of parties in legal proceedings requires shared interest; allegations of fraud can be considered within same proceedings to prevent multiplicity of litigation.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that transposition of a defendant as a plaintiff is permissible only if their interest is identical to that of the plaintiff and they have a substa....
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
