Advocates:
['M/S ASHOK TRIPATHY', '', 'A TRIPATHY', 'P C DAS', '', 'A K CHOUDHURY']

C.M.P. No.254 of 2014

&

C.M.P. No.255 of 2014

07.

22.03.2017

Heard Mr. A.Tripathy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.K. Choudhur

y, learned counsel for the opposite party no.6.

Panchanan Praharaj, predecessor-in-interest of opposite party nos.1 to 5 as pl

aintiffs, instituted suits in the court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Berhampur, G

anjam for declaration of right, title and interest and permanent injunction impleading opposit

e party no.6 as defendant. During pendency of the suit, he died. Thereafter opposite party no

s.1 to 5 were substituted. While the matter stood thus, the petitioner filed an application u

nder Order 1 Rule 10 for impleadment on the ground that she is the wife of plaintiff no.1(b).

The original plaintiff executed willnama in her favour. The learned trial court rejected the

application.

The distinction between a necessary party and a proper party is well known. In

Udit Narain Singh Malpaharia-Vrs.-Additional Member Board of Revenue, Bihar and another, AIR

1963 SC 786, the apex Court held that a necessary party is one without whom no order can be ma

de effectively, a proper part