Civil Procedure Code, 1908
Order 1 Rule 10—Necessary party—Who is—For being a necessary party, the twin test has to be satisfied—First one is that there must be a right to some relief against such party in respect of the controversies involved in the proceedings—Second one is that no effective decree can be passed in the absence of such a party.
[Para 20]
Specific Performance
Agreement to sell—Non-joinder of parties—High Court denied the specific performance but directed the defendant to refund the amount along with interest—Appeal—Plaintiff himself has admitted in the plaint that the suit property is jointly owned by the defendant, his wife and three sons—A specific objection was also taken by defendant in his written statement with regard to non-joinder of necessary parties—Since the suit property was jointly owned by defendant along with his wife and three sons, an effective decree could not have been passed affecting the rights of the defendant’s wife and three sons without impleading them—Even in spite of the defendant taking an objection in that regard, the plaintiff has chosen not to implead the defendant’s wife and three sons as party defendants—In view of the plaintiff’s own admission that suit property was jointly owned by the defendant, his wife and three sons, no effective decree could have been passed in their absence—No error found in impugned judgment of High Court—Appeals dismissed.
[Paras 19 & 21]