Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 13,14,15

  Parties--Misjoinder-Non-joinder-Suit not to be defeated on ground of-Court to deal with matter In controversy between parties actually before it-Rules of the Supreme Court of England, O. XIV, rr. 13 to 15-Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. I. r. 9.   A brought a suit on the basis of a servitude, for an injunction to restrain B from preventing A's cattle from grazing on certain land which was in occupation of B, and for damages for wrongfully seizing and impounding As cattle on previous occasions. A knew that B's title to land had been derived by purchase from C but no conveyance or document had been executed in implementation of the purchase. It was, however, agreed between the parties to the suit that no objection would be taken at the trial on the score of absence of a deed, although by the law of the Colony transfer of land could not be effected except by passing and executing a " transport " or a conveyance.   C was not made a party to the suit. There was a counter claim by B traversing the allegations of A and claiming damages.   The trial Judge dismissed the suit on merits and partially decreed the counter-claim.   The Court of Appeal, however, without going into merits of the case, dismissed the suit and set aside the judgment on the counter-claim, on the ground that the proceedings were wrongly constituted as proper parties were not before the Court, that the suit should have been directed against the owner of the servant tenement, namely, C whose title had n of yet legally passed to B because of the absence of a conveyance:   Held, that the omission of C from the suit could not make the action fundamentally bad. As B had a real interest to dispute the existence of a servitude technicalities as to his legal title should not stand in the way.   Further, that B was a necessary party to the suit and indeed the only proper party so far as the claim for an injunction and damages for impounding A's cattle was concerned. Equally A was a necessary party to the counter claim.   The suit, therefore, should not have been defeated, but rather, the third party C, should have been made a party even at…