Embedded Files
CPC (Civil Procedure Code, 1908 ) CPC -Orders and Rules Order 1 Rule 10
Dominus litis
Dominus litis
A third party or a stranger cannot be added in a suit for specific performance, merely in order to find out who is in possession of the contracted property or to avoid multiplicity of the suits
A third party or a stranger cannot be added in a suit for specific performance, merely in order to find out who is in possession of the contracted property or to avoid multiplicity of the suits
CPC, Order 1 Rule 10 - Suit for specific performance - Dominus litis - In view of the principle that the plaintiff who has filed a suit for specific performance of the contract to sell is the dominus litis, he cannot be forced to add parties against whom, he does not want to fight unless it is a compulsion of the rule of law - To add a party who is not made a party in the suit by the plaintiff shall not arise unless a party proposed to be added has direct and legal interest in the controversy involved in the suit - That two tests are to be satisfied for determining the question who is a necessary party - The tests are (1) there must be a right to some relief against such party in respect of the controversies involved in the proceedings; (2) no effective decree can be passed in the absence of such party - In a suit for specific performance the first test can be formulated is, to determine whether a party is a necessary party there must be a right to the same relief against the party claiming to be a necessary party, relating to the same subject matter involved in the proceedings for specific performance of contract to sell - In a suit for specific performance of the contract, a proper party is a party whose presence is necessary to adjudicate the controversy involved in the suit - Parties claiming an independent title and possession adverse to the title of the vendor and not on the basis of the contract, are not proper parties and if such party is impleaded in the suit, the scope of the suit for specific performance shall be enlarged to a suit for title and possession, which is impermissible - A third party or a stranger cannot be added in a suit for specific performance, merely in order to find out who is in possession of the contracted property or to avoid multiplicity of the suits - A third party or a stranger to a contract cannot be added so as to convert a suit of one character into a suit of different character .
2005 SCeJ 001 Kasturi vs Uyyamperumal, (2005) 6 SCC 733.
Suit for Specific performance of sale
Suit for Specific performance of sale
CPC, Order 1 Rule 10 - Suit for Specific performance of sale - Merely in order to find out who is in possession of the contracted property, a third party or a stranger to the contract cannot be added in a suit for specific performance of the contract to sell because they are not necessary parties as there was no semblance of right to some relief against the party to the contract - In a suit for specific performance of the contract to sell the lis between the vendor and the persons in whose favour agreement to sell is executed shall only be gone into and it is also not open to the Court to decide whether any other parties have acquired any title and possession of the contracted property - If the plaintiff who has filed a suit for specific performance of the contract to sell, even after receiving the notice of claim of title and possession by other persons (not parties to the suit and even not parties to the agreement to sell for which a decree for specific performance is sought) does not want to join them in the pending suit, it is always done at the risk of the plaintiff because he cannot be forced to join the third parties as party-defendants in such suit.
CPC, Order 1 Rule 10 - Suit for Specific performance of sale - Merely in order to find out who is in possession of the contracted property, a third party or a stranger to the contract cannot be added in a suit for specific performance of the contract to sell because they are not necessary parties as there was no semblance of right to some relief against the party to the contract - In a suit for specific performance of the contract to sell the lis between the vendor and the persons in whose favour agreement to sell is executed shall only be gone into and it is also not open to the Court to decide whether any other parties have acquired any title and possession of the contracted property - If the plaintiff who has filed a suit for specific performance of the contract to sell, even after receiving the notice of claim of title and possession by other persons (not parties to the suit and even not parties to the agreement to sell for which a decree for specific performance is sought) does not want to join them in the pending suit, it is always done at the risk of the plaintiff because he cannot be forced to join the third parties as party-defendants in such suit.
2005 SCeJ 001 Kasturi vs Uyyamperumal, (2005) 6 SCC 733.
CPC, Order 1 Rule 10 - Necessary party - Plaintiff has a dominus litus - He has a right to implead proper party - The petitioner, who is stranger to the controversy, cannot be permitted to become party in a suit as no relief against him is claimed by the plaintiffs.
(143) PLR 362
CPC, Order 1 Rule 10, Order 22 Rule 10 - Assignee of suit property, pending adjudication of a lis, cannot be impleaded as a party under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC but may be allowed to continue or defend the suit under Order 22 Rule 10 of the CPC, by stepping into the shoes of the party assigning property to him.
(152) PLR 463
Report abuse