The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed a writ petition challenging a trial court's order impleading a party under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC. The petitioner argued prior dismissal under Order 22 Rule 3 barred further action.
The writ petition was dismissed, upholding the trial court's order allowing impleadment under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1 / 4
2024:CGHC:30549
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
W.P(227) No.167 of 2020
Smt. Lalit W/o Shri Gaurishankar Sahu Aged About 56 Years R/o Village - Jharmuda, Thana And Tahsil Pithoura, Civil And Revenue District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner
Versus
| For Petitioner : Shri Sunil Sahu, Advocate. |
|---|
| For Respondent No.1 : Shri Raghavendra Pradhan, Advocate |
| For Respondent No.2/State : Shri Pramod Ramteke, PL |
| For Respondent No.3 : Shri Roop Naik, Advocate. |
Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order on Board
13.08.2024
India assailing the legality and validity of the order dated 06.01.2020
2 / 4
passed by the 1st Additional Civil Judge, Class-2, Basna, District Mahasamund (CG) in Civil Suit No.12-A/17 whereby, the application preferred by the proposed Respondent No.3 under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC on the basis of the questioned Will executed by the deceased Plaintiff in his favour, was allowed by the trial Court and he was arrayed as a party Defendant in the suit.
3 / 4
of Pankajbhai Rameshbhai Zalavadiya vs. Jethabhai Kalabhai
Zalavadia through legal representatives and Others reported in (2017) 9 SCC 700.
“10. Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code enables the court to add any person as a party at any stage of the proceedings, if the person whose presence in court is necessary in order to enable the court to effectively and completely adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the suit. Avoidance of multiplicity of proceedings is also one of the objects of the said provision. Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code empowers the court to substitute a party in the suit who is a wrong person with a right person. If the court is satisfied that the suit has been instituted through a bona fide mistake, and also that it is necessary for the determination of the real matter in controversy to substitute a party in the suit, it may direct it to be done. When the court finds that in the absence of the persons sought to be impleaded as a party to the suit, the controversy raised in the suit cannot be effectively and completely settled, the court would do justice by impleading such persons. Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the Code gives wide
4 / 4
discretion to the court to deal with such a situation which may result in prejudicing the interests of the affected party if not impleaded in the suit, and where the impleadment of the said party is necessary and vital for the decision of the suit.”
Sd/-
(Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge
Priya
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere under Article 227 as the trial court applied Order 1 Rule 10 CPC to implead a party claiming title via will.
Whether the dismissal of a prior Order 22 Rule 3 application bars the application of Order 1 Rule 10 CPC for impleadment.
Whether the impleadment of a person claiming title through a fraudulent will was necessary for complete adjudication of the suit.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Pankajbhai Rameshbhai Zalavadiya vs. Jethabhai Kalabhai ZalavadiaRelied on¶22
(2017) 9 SCC 700 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Smt. Lalit W/o Shri Gaurishankar Sahu
Ramgovind S/o Late Shri Dhadhiwaman Sahu
State Of Chhattisgarh
Praveen Sahu
Deepak Kumar Tiwari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
