Case Details

Citation(s)
2019 SLG 604 2019 SLD 604 2019 MLD 212
Sindh High Court
Suit No. 1593 of 2012 and Suit No. 1934 of 2014, decision Dated: 17-05-2018. Hearing Dated: 21-03-2018.
ADNAN IQBAL CHAUDHRY, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Abid S. Zuberi and Saad Saeed (in Suit No.1593 of 2012 and the Defendant in Suit No.1934 of 2014).
Respondent(s) by: Athar Ali Memon for Intervenors (in Suit No.1593 of 2012). Muhammad Ashraf Khan Mughal for Intervenors (in Suit No.15

NAZAR GUL

VS

MAYMAR HOUSING SERVICE (PVT.) LTD. AND 4 OTHERS

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.I,R.10,10(2)

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. I, R. 10---Suit for declaration---Allotment of suit land in favour of interveners/ applicants---Necessary and proper party---Impleadment of---Object---Allotment letters of suit property were issued in favour of interveners/applicants---Interveners sought impleadment as party to the suit---Validity---Any person could be joined as a proper party even though no relief was claimed against him---Primary object of impleading a "proper party" was to avoid multiplicity of legal proceedings---No person could be added as party so as to set up a new cause of action having no concern with the original parties---Court had discretion to add parties in the suit but said discretion was to be exercised in view of facts and circumstances of a particular case---If a person did not qualify as a "necessary" or a "proper party" Court had no jurisdiction to add him as a party---Interveners, in the present case, had claimed to be necessary party for seeking relief for specific performance of their allotment letters for which they had independent remedy---Interveners could not derive the relief of specific performance of their allotment letter in the present suit---Such relief could only be sought by the interveners by way of an independent suit for specific performance---Decree in the present suit would not in any way adversely affect the separate remedy available to the applicants---Interveners/applicants could not be impleaded as necessary parties in the present suit---Prerogative of plaintiff to add parties as dominus litis was subject to such parties qualifying the test of necessary or property parties---Application for impleadment of party was dismissed in circumstances. Uzin Export Import Enterprises for Foreign Trade v. Union Bank of Middle East Ltd. PLD 1994 SC 95 ref. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. I, R. 10(2)---"Distinction between a proper party and necessary party" in terms of O.I, R.10, C.P.C. and prerogative of court to add parties to a suit summarized. Distinction between a 'proper party' and a 'necessary party' to a suit in terms of Order I, Rule 10, C.P.C., and the prerogative of the Court to add parties…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492