Power to Strike Off Unnecessary Parties - The courts have the authority to strike off the name of a defendant or parties if they are deemed wholly unnecessary to the case, such as when there is no cause of action or no privity of contract. This applies under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC and other relevant provisions. For example, courts can remove unnecessary defendants or parties to streamline proceedings and avoid unnecessary complications Shingora Textiles Ltd. VS Mimaki Engineering Company Ltd. - Punjab and Haryana, Southern and Rajamani Transport Private Limited Madurai & Others VS R. Srinivasan & Others - Madras, STATE TRADE CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED VS CHITTOOR CO-OPERATIVE SUGAR LIMITED - Delhi.
Misjoinder and Necessity of Parties - Courts emphasize the importance of proper impleading of necessary parties and the removal of unnecessary ones to uphold principles of natural justice. Misjoinder or unnecessary parties can be struck off to ensure the case proceeds fairly and efficiently Bharmaputra Biochem Private Limited VS New India Assurance Company - Supreme Court.
Striking Pleadings and Evidence - Courts may strike off pleadings, evidence, or specific paragraphs if they are irrelevant, scandalous, frivolous, or tend to prejudice the trial. Such actions are permissible only when pleadings or evidence are unnecessary or beyond the scope of the case. Delay in filing such applications is a relevant factor; courts require satisfaction that the pleadings are unnecessary before striking them off Abdul Razak (D) Through L. Rs. VS Mangesh Rajaram Wagle - Rajasthan, Arun Jaitley VS Arvind Kejriwal - Delhi.
Specific Cases and Judicial Discretion - Courts have exercised discretion in cases like striking off additional defendants, parts of election petitions, or pleadings filed after significant delay. The courts generally hold that pleadings or parties can be struck off if they are unnecessary, scandalous, or cause prejudice, but delay and proper justification are crucial considerations ST.MARY'S ORTHODOX CHURCH Vs M.ISSAC - Kerala, M. K. Stalin VS Saidai Sa. Duraisamy - Madras, Abdul Razak (D) Through L. Rs. VS Mangesh Rajaram Wagle - Rajasthan.
Analysis and Conclusion:
Courts possess a broad but judicious power to strike off unnecessary parties or pleadings under CPC and constitutional provisions. This power aims to prevent unnecessary prolongation of litigation, uphold justice, and ensure only relevant parties and evidence are involved. The decision to strike off hinges on whether the parties or pleadings are unnecessary, scandalous, or prejudicial, with courts also considering delays and procedural fairness. Proper application of this power facilitates efficient and fair adjudication of cases.
plaintiff - rejection of plaint - The court has the power to strike off the name of a defendant if such party is wholly unnecessary ... Ratio Decidendi: The court has the power to strike off the name of a defendant if such party is wholly unnecessary under Order ... Issues: The main issue was the rejection of the plaint in part, specifically regarding defendant No.4, and the court's power to strike ... The Court is well within its ....
Issues: Misjoinder of parties, duty of NCDRC to strike off unnecessary parties, impleading of necessary parties, principles ... The court also emphasized the duty of NCDRC to strike off unnecessary parties and the impleading of necessary parties for principles ... off unnecessary parties, the impleading of necessary parties, and the principles of natural justice in the context of the Consumer ... The striking of surveyor from the array of parties wo....
The court can also strike off a plaint if there is no cause of action against a party. ... The court invoked Article 227 of the Constitution of India to strike off the plaint in respect of the defendants. ... The defendants argued that they were unnecessary parties as there was no privity of contract between them and the plaintiff. ... This civil revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to strike off the....
strike off/delete their evidence as a whole, midway without completing their examination. ... --Once the witnesses examined, were in the hands of the Court, then it was not appropriate for the Court to strike off/delete their ... that the Court could ignore such evidence being irrelevant, inadmissible, beyond pleading or issues, being scandalous or otherwise unnecessary ... Once the witnesses examined, were in the hands of the Court, then it was not appropriate for the Court to strike ....
Fact of the Case: A writ petition was filed to strike off additional defendants from the original suit, which sought ... Finding of the Court: The court found that it was not permissible to strike off defendants who had been allowed to ... This writ petition is preferred by the plaintiffs in the original suit filed under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of CPC to strike
The court also struck off a portion of another paragraph as unnecessary. ... The Returned Candidate sought to strike out specific paragraphs of the election petition, alleging that they were irrelevant, scandalous ... Finding of the Court: The court struck off certain paragraphs of the election petition, holding them to be unnecessary ... However, the other sentences in paragraph No.11 cannot be said to be unnecessary and the same is not struck off. ... (iv) Parag....
C.P.C., Order 6 Rule 16 — Striking off the additional written statement after 3-1/2 years — Delay not explained — The additional ... pleadings of the additional written statement , the High Court was not at all justified in allowing the application filed for striking off ... The court can strike off the pleadings only if it is satisfied that the same are unnecessary, scandalous, frivolous or vexatious or tend to prejudice, embarrass or delay the fair trial of the suit or the court is satisfied that suit....
After two years of impleading and filing the additional written statement, the Respondent No:1 and 2 had filed an application to str5ike ... off the additional written statement, stating that they have taken inconstant pleadings with the original written statement. ... The high Court had set aside the order of the trial court and holding that the delay in filing the petition for striking off the ... The court can strike off the pleadings only if it is satisfied that the same are unnecessary#HL....
Decision: The court dismissed the application for a stay of the suit under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act and the application to strike ... off Defendant No. 3 as a defendant under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC. ... Whether Defendant No. 3 was a necessary party to the suit. Ratio Decidendi: 1. ... to a suit, and no relief is claimed against him, it would be improper and unnecessary to retain him and he may be struck off from the suit. ... ... ( 11 ) UNDERORDER 1, Rule 10 (2) Civil Procedure Code if a #HL_STAR....
/0256/2013 Fact of the Case: The defendant filed an application under Order 6 Rule 16 read with Section 151 CPC to strike ... Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the replication can neither be termed as scandalous nor frivolous or vexatious or unnecessary ... Striking off pleadings - Order 6 Rule 16 CPC - Anant Construction (P) Ltd. Vs. Ram Niwas, MANU/DE/0407/1994; Sahib Singh Vs. ... The court can strike off the pleadings only if it is satisfied that the same are unnecessary, scan....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.