Additional Defendants Cannot Be Impleaded By The Defendants In A Suit Without The Wish Of The Plaintiff
The division bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Hon’ble Justices M. R, Shah and Krishna Murari, passed a judgment on September 16, 2022, in the matter of Sudhamayee Pattnaik and Ors. vs. Bibhu Prasad Sahoo and Ors. [Civil Appeal No. 6370 Of 2022], reiterating the position of the law with respect to Order 1 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, which provides for the procedure of adding Defendants to an existing suit.
The division bench held that no Defendant can file an application to implead additional Defendants against the Plaintiff’s wishes as the position of law is well settled that regards the Plaintiff as dominus litus. The only exception to this rule would be if the Court suo motu directs to join any other person not party to the suit for effective decree and/or for proper adjudication as per Order 1 Rule 10 CPC.
The bench also held that non-impleadment of Defendants would be at the risk of the Plaintiff. For instance, as per the facts of this matter, the Defendants had filed a counter-claim for declaration of their right, title and interest over the suit property in question and permanent injunction against the Palintiffs, and in case the counter-claim is allowed, as the Plaintiffs are opposing to implead the subsequent purchasers as party Defendants, thereafter it will not be open for the Plaintiffs to contend that no decree in the counter-claim be passed in absence of the subsequent purchasers.
Recent Posts
- Regulatory Transformation of the External Commercial Borrowings Framework: A Comparative Analysis
- Beware: Posting Online Content
- India’s New Startup Recognition Regime: Special Focus on Deep Tech Startups
- COMPARATIVE NOTE - LABOUR LAW CODES
- SEBI Issues Master Circular to Streamline Disclosure and Compliance in Debt Markets
- SEBI’S Approach to Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning: Exploring SEBI’S AI/ML Consultation Paper
- Clove Legal has successfully obtained a landmark order from the Hon’ble Bombay High Court directing MahaRERA to implement structured guidelines governing its hearing procedures and functioning framework.
- Regulatory Roundup: Key Corporate & Financial Law Updates
- Bombay High Court reprimands MahaRERA for not holding in-person hearings - Writ Petition filed by Clove Legal on behalf of aggrieved home buyer.
- Bombay High Court Clarifies Interplay between Information Technology Act, 2000 and Indian Penal Code 1860, in Cybercrime Cases
