AI Overview...
-
Guilty of Malfeasance as a Party - Trustees or individuals found guilty of malfeasance, misfeasance, or gross negligence can be ordered to be removed from office and may be held liable for their misconduct. Courts have explicitly held trustees guilty of such acts, leading to their removal and potential legal consequences Tirunarayana Pillai VS P. R. Y. Manickavachagam Chettiar - Madras, Ramesh Rajan VS Palanivel Thiagarajan - Madras.
-
Impleading as a Party - A person not necessary or proper to be joined as a party (e.g., those who are neither necessary nor proper parties) cannot be impleaded in a case. Proper party inclusion depends on their direct involvement or necessity for adjudication. For example, claims based on fraud, misrepresentation, or improper conduct must involve parties who are directly implicated or affected Nirmal Jain VS Ahuja Impex Pvt. Ltd. - Delhi.
-
Legal Proceedings and Party Involvement - In cases involving malfeasance, courts may suo moto implead third parties if their involvement is relevant to the case, such as in the removal of employees or trustees guilty of misconduct. However, vague allegations or lack of specific acts of misconduct can weaken claims against third parties or those seeking to be impleaded Rajagopal VS Balachandran and others - Madras, Ramesh Rajan VS Palanivel Thiagarajan - Madras.
-
Liability of Directors and Trustees - Directors or trustees can be held liable under common law for acts of malfeasance, misfeasance, or tort, especially when inducing third parties with fraudulent misrepresentation. Their liability is confined to acts of breach of trust or tortious conduct, and not mere negligence unless linked to malfeasance Tristar Consultants VS Customer Services India Pvt. Ltd. - Delhi.
-
Court’s Discretion on Joinder of Parties - Courts may refuse to implead parties if their presence is unnecessary for adjudication, or if allegations are vague. Proper party joinder is essential to ensure fair trial and avoid unnecessary complications Nirmal Jain VS Ahuja Impex Pvt. Ltd. - Delhi, Rajagopal VS Balachandran and others - Madras.
-
Implication for Advocates and Legal Practice - Advocates can be held guilty of misconduct or contempt if they scandalize the court or interfere with justice. Proper conduct and clarity in allegations are crucial, especially when implicating parties in malfeasance Pritam Pal VS High Court of M. P. , Jabalpur through Registrar - Supreme Court.
Analysis and Conclusion:
An advocate or individual accused of malfeasance can be impleaded as a party if their involvement is direct and relevant to the case. However, courts emphasize the importance of proper joinder, specific allegations, and the necessity of the party’s involvement for the case to proceed. Trustees or directors found guilty of malfeasance can be ordered to cease their misconduct and face removal, and their liability can extend to third parties if their acts induce or involve third-party harm. Proper legal procedure and clear allegations are vital in ensuring that only necessary parties are impleaded, and justice is effectively served Tirunarayana Pillai VS P. R. Y. Manickavachagam Chettiar - Madras, Nirmal Jain VS Ahuja Impex Pvt. Ltd. - Delhi, Ramesh Rajan VS Palanivel Thiagarajan - Madras.
Search Results for "Advocate Guilty of Malfeasance can be Impleaded as Party"
1933 0 Supreme(Mad) 346 • India - Madras
KRISHNAN PANDALAI, CURGENVEN, PANDALAI
Ratio Decidendi: The court found the trustees guilty of malfeasance, misfeasance, and gross negligence, and ordered their ... Finding of the Court: The court found the trustees guilty of malfeasance, misfeasance, and gross negligence, and ordered ... of malfeasance, misfeasance, and gross negligence, and ordered their removal from office. ... The case cited by the learned Advocate General, Wrightson In re Wrightson v. ... For this purpose the memorandum of objections and the appeal ....
2016 0 Supreme(Del) 4368 • India - Delhi
INDIRA BANERJEE, ANIL KUMAR CHAWLA
- Whose presence is not necessary for adjudication of issues involved ought not to be impleaded - Order has been passed without ... misrepresentations, fraud by the improper conduct - Any claim on account of acts of fraud, misrepresentation, improper conduct, malfeasance ... their predecessors in interest - A person against whom there is no cause of action - A person who is neither necessary nor a proper party ... In the plaint, it is also vaguely alleged that all the directors made misrepresentations, committed fraud by the improper cond....
2018 0 Supreme(Ker) 921 • India - Kerala
P.UBAID
'S' is guilty of an offence under this section. ... If a person not expecting to be in office obtains a gratification by deceiving others into a belief that he is about to be in office, and that he will then serve them, he may be guilty of cheating, but he is not guilty of the offence defined in this section. ... In Advocate General v. T.A Rajendran 1998 (1) KLT 305 a Division Bench of this Court led by the then Hon'ble Chief Justice held thus in paragraph 8 of the judgment. ... The VACB will have to make enquiry into di....
• India - Crimes
P.UBAID
‘S’ is guilty of an offence under this section. Explanation 2. ... If a person not expecting to be in office obtains a gratification by deceiving others into a belief that he is about to be in office, and that he will then serve them, he may be guilty of cheating, but he is not guilty of the offence defined in this section. (b) “Gratification”. ... In Advocate General v. T.A Rajendran [1998 (1) KLT 305], a Division Bench of this Court led by the then Hon’ble Chief Justice held thus in paragraph 8 of the judgment. ... The....
2007 0 Supreme(Del) 493 • India - Delhi
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
The judgment clarified that the liability of directors to third parties may arise in cases of malfeasance, misfeasance, or tort, ... such as fraudulent misrepresentation inducing a third party to part with money. ... Other than where directors have made themselves personally liable i.e. by way of guarantee, indemnity etc. liabilities of directors of a company, under common law; are confined to cases of malfeasance and misfeasance i.e. where ... they have been guilty of tort towards those to whom ... The other facet of th....
2001 0 Supreme(Mad) 963 • India - Madras
PRABHA SRIDEVAN
court regarding enquiry into fact of commission and omission by the managing trustee of the Trust-During pendency of revision third party ... He also submitted that the affidavit does not bring any specific act of misfeasance and malfeasance and the allegations are very vague. ... of breach of trust as persons who may be found actually guilty of misappropriating property belonging to the trust. ... In this case, the learned counsel for the contesting respondent strongly urged that the person seeking to implead himself had long ago left Ma....
2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 15488 • India - High Court of Andhra Pradesh
N. HARINATH, J
302, 201, 120-B, read with Section 149 - Criminal Procedure Code - Section 41-A - Request for CBI investigation due to alleged malfeasance ... By entrusting the investigation to CBI which, as aforesaid, was imperative in the peculiar facts of the present case, the fact that the petitioner was not impleaded as a party in the writ petition or for that matter, was not heard, in our opinion, will be of no avail. ... The criminal justice administration system in India places human rights and dignity for human rights at a much higher pedestal a....
1992 0 Supreme(SC) 176 • India - Supreme Court
S.R.PANDIAN, K.JAYACHANDRA REDDY
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Rule 5 - Section 16 - Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 - Retirement from Service - guilty ... nothing came out of it - Held, Court unhesitatingly confirm the finding of High Court that the appellant/contemner has made himself guilty ... Chinappa Reddy, J. speaking for the Bench in Advocate General, Bihar v. M. P. ... Pritam Lal is guilty of criminal contempt of not only scandalising the Court and lowering its authority but also substantially interfering with the due course of justic....
2009 0 Supreme(SC) 1431 • India - Supreme Court
S.B.SINHA, DEEPAK VERMA
Prasad were negligent, they cannot be held guilty u/s 304-A. ... Prasad were negligent, they cannot be held guilty u/s 304-A. ... – No prejudice to impleaded parties – Non-joinder not a ground to dismiss the petition – Similarly, issuing notices to a large number ... Garg have not been impleaded as opposite parties it can not result in dismissal of the original petition as a whole." ... Laxman Iyer, (2003) 8 SCC 731, para 6; Adavanced Law Lexicon, P Ramanatha Aiyar, 3rd ed. 2005, p. 3161] ... Negligence is strictly non....
2020 0 Supreme(Mad) 2146 • India - Madras
P.T.ASHA
In fact, the following steps have been taken by the Trust to remedy the malfeasance of the employee: i. Removal of the concerned employee from his position to avoid any further acts of malfeasance; ii. ... He would therefore submit that no public interest was involved in the above suit and that apart the applicants are guilty of approaching the Court with unclean hands. ... The suit was originally filed only against the 1st defendant and thereafter this Court has suo moto impleaded the respondents 2 to 4. 2. ... The 1st ....
Filter by Legal Phrase
