Joseph v. Nagarajan
Case brief
What is this about?
The petitioner challenged an order allowing impleadment of a third party after a six-year delay. The Court held that allowing such belated impleadment would amount to substituting a new suit. The Civil Revision Petition was dismissed.
What the court decided
CRP(MD)No.319 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 18.11.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR
CRP(MD)No.319 of 2020 and C.M.P(MD)No.1814 of 2020
Joseph ... Petitioner/Petitioner/Plaintiff
Vs
1.Nagarajan 2.Murugesh ... Respondents 1 and 2/Respondents 1 and 2/ Defendants 1 and 2
3.Senthilkumar ... 3rd Respondent/3rd Respondent/ Proposed 3rd Defendant
Prayer:
This Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to call for the records relating to Fair and Decreetal order in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in O.S.No. 10 of 2023 passed by the learned Additional District Munsif, Padmanabhapuram, dated 05.11.2019 and set aside the same.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the trial Court should have allowed the impleading of a necessary party after a delay of six years?
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Joseph
- respondent
Nagarajan
- respondent
Murugesh
- respondent
Senthilkumar
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court