Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O. I, R. 10 , 107

(a)   Admiralty Jurisdiction of High Courts Ordinance (XLII of 1980)---

----Ss. 3(2)(a) & 7---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. I, R. 10 & S. 107--Admiralty Appeal---Dispute over violation of charter agreement of vessel for voyage hire charges causing loss to the appellant-company---Arrest of vessel---Application by the intervener to be impleaded as party in the proceedings---Appellant denied claim of the intervener to be owner of vessel---Validity---Order I, Rule 10, C.P.C., in conjunction with S.107, C.P.C., extends to appeals, bestowing the appellate court with the prerogative to substitute or add any entity as appellant or respondent, provided they are indispensable and proper parties to the proceedings---Despite the plaintiffs being dominus litis (masters of the suit) with a vested interest in the case's resolution, the court may compel the inclusion of a party if their presence is pivotal for a comprehensive and effective adjudication of the matter---General jurisprudential tenet for impleading parties posits that the plaintiff, as the master of the suit, may elect the individuals against whom they wish to litigate and cannot be coerced into litigating against an entity from whom no relief is sought, however, a proper party is one whose presence would enable the court to thoroughly, efficaciously and adequately adjudicate upon all matters in dispute in the suit, notwithstanding their status as a party in favour or against whom the decree is to be rendered---Intervener's claim of ownership was buttressed by documentary evidence, and was consonant with the principles governing the inclusion of indispensable and proper parties, thus, the intervener was impleaded as a respondent in the appeal to ensure an equitable and comprehensive resolution of the matter---Application was allowed and appeal was disposed of, in circumstances.