Relying on the above judgment, learned counsel submits that the applicant has a direct interest and legal right to be protected and his impleadment would also prevent multiplicity of proceedings. The opposing parties quite logically would refer to the plaintiff and the defendant. In K Kamaraja Nadar v. These two judgments were found not inconsistent to each other as seen from another ruling. No such application was filed within stipulated time. Vohra submits that in any case, the land would vest with the Consolidation Officer and not in Gaon Sabha.
The plaintiff has to decide who he would like to claim relief from. Any order passed in aid of the suit is in exercise of ancillary powers. Test For Determining The Necessary Parties To A Civil Suit Although there is no definite test to be applied in this connection, the tests that have been laid down in Deputy Commissioner of Hardoi v. The present bench, pointing out that the tribunal's order refusing to implead Vaiko and others in the case had not been appealed against and hence had attained finality, said: The petitions challenging the final orders passed by the tribunal after allowing its decision in rejecting their claim for impleadment to attain finality, are undoubtedly not maintainable. In a civil suit the following person can be joined as Plaintiff or Defendants : 10. The writ petition was restored vide order dated 14. Once the existence of prima facie case is made out the court should analyze the 2nd condition viz.
It is well-settled that if the oral and documentary evidence are found enough to resolve the controversies in the suit, the rejection of application for appointment of a Commissioner is a valid one. An attachment before judgment is in the nature of an interlocutory order. However, anybody whose interest is likely to be directly affected by the decision of the court is a necessary party. Therefore, if complete and effective relief can be claimed by the plaintiff from some parties, there is no need to join other parties since other parties are not necessary parties. According to the aforesaid, the joinder of plaintiffs and defendants requires a right of relief in respect of the same act or transaction, which has to be alleged to exist. The original owner passed away leaving four sons, of whom one son passed away.
The underlying characteristic shall still be that his presence shall be helpful in enabling the court to decide the dispute. If a suit is dismissed straightaway for a non-joinder of necessary parties, the plaintiff will have to file the suit again, resulting in multiplicity of litigation. The court must not be in a position to pass an effective decree in the absence of such a party. This shall depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. But when Court feels the claims should be adjudicated upon in trial in those cases, Court directs and relegates the claims to a suit.
In other words, it refers to impleading an unnecessary party. In these circumstances, as discussed above and considering that neither the applicant nor the Predecessor-in-title were parties before the Consolidation Officer and the fact that the previous application moved for impleadment had been withdrawn as back as 4. Mahender Rana, learned counsel for the applicant, in support of the application, submits that the applicant is an owner of 1 bigha of land, by virtue of Sale Deed, executed by Mishri, who has been allotted the land by the Gaon Sabha, under the confirmed scheme. Proper parties need not be impleaded. The sale deed was executed by Gopaljis sons and his grandson. The plaintiffs interest would be in relief being available to him in a single suit, while that of the defendant would be in preventing multiplicity of litigation, inconsistent relief, or sole liability for the wrongs that he himself has not committed. Moreover, their interest has to lie in the subject matter of the suit, not in any other question that may be incidental or secondary to the main issue in question.
The underlying logic is procedural defects in a suit should be checked at the earliest. For instance, in a suit filed against a partnership firm, all partners would be necessary parties. On this point, the district court held that there could not be a joinder of defendants since joint actions would mean a number of issues that would have little relationship with one another. Such contesting candidates will have to be joined as respondents to such a petition. The presence of opposing parties is one of the essential requirements of any civil suit.
In the present suit, it was held that the owner of the car and its insurer were not necessary parties since no relief had been claimed from them. Immediately, thereafter petitioner preferred a writ petition and an order of status quo was passed on 6. When you're talking about abstract classes and interfaces, you're talking about writing the parts that you need to write because you inherited that class or said that you're implementing that interface. The appellants contended that the employees who were likely to be affected by the decision had not been impleaded. In interlocutory stage, when the Courts are concerned about prima facie case, the Court tries interlocutory applications on affidavits. Jyoti Sikka by this application seeks impleadment as a respondent in the writ petition.
On the one hand, the plaintiff has to be entitled to speedy relief, thus enabling him to file a single suit against several defendants. Should he refuse to do so even after an objection is raised in this connection, the suit will be dismissed. Shivappa are the opposing parties, the subject matter in dispute, the cause of action and the relief claimed by the plaintiff. Mere negect, or suffering execution by other creditors, is not a sufficient reason for an order under Order 38 of the Code. Those who are likely to be affected by the decision of the court do not automatically become necessary parties.
He happens to be a stranger to the proceedings. January 08, 2004 Manmohan Sarin,J. The plaintiff claimed relief against the Railways by impleading it through its representatives. When Can Joinder of Parties Take Place? Power of court to issue commissions. If a person is not found to be a proper or necessary party, the court has no jurisdiction to implead him, against the wishes of the plaintiff. In Para 17 of the judgment, it was held as follows:17. M Ghosh, the plaintiff filed a suit against a doctor due to whose negligence his wife had died.