PLD 2023 Sindh 293
Necessary party --- Scope --- Addition of a person in a suit without hearing him --- Scope --- Application under O. I , R. 10 of Civil Procedure Code , 1908 , was moved by the plaintiff contending that appellant be added as a defendant to the suit as he (appellant) had allegedly purchased suit-property --- Appellant opposed the application by rendering counter affidavit , however , Court accepted said application in the absence of appellant at the time of arguments --- Held , that while making an order under sub-Rule ( 2 ) of R. 10 of 0. I of Civil Procedure Code , 1908 , the main criteria should be whether or not the presence of the person , who was seeking to be added as a party or whose addition was sought by any of the parties , was necessary to enable the Court to adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the suit effectively and completely --- Court , before adding any personas a party to suit , had to ensure that the suit could not proceed in his absence nor the question involved therein could be decided effectively and completely in his absence --- Application under R. 10 of O. I of Civil Procedure Co 1908 was ved , in the present case , on the sole ground that the suit - property had been sold to him (appellant) by the defendant's mother , thus concluding him (appellant) as a necessary party --- Said order was passed admittedly in the absence of the appellant , without affording him an opportunity of hearing --- Court , in the impugned order , had not considered/decided the question as to whether the appellant was to be deemed as a necessary party by purchasing the suit - property when the suit was not pending whereas said point/question , inter alia , was specifically raised by the appellant in his counter affidavit --- Addition of a person as a defendant in a suit ; without his consent and despite his opposition , cast a heavy responsibility and duty upon him to defend the suit by going through the rigors of formal and lengthy court proceedings , by facing and also by incurring heavy consequences of such proceedings expenses --- If appellant , had opposed his addition as a party to the proceedings , a fair opportunity of hearing should have been given to him --- Fate of the application under R. 10 of 0. I of Civil Procedure Code , 1908 , ought to have been decided after hearing the appellant , especially when he was on notice and he had filed a detailed counter affidavit to oppose the said application --- Impugned order passed by the Single Judge of the High Court was set aside and matter was remanded for decision afresh , in circumstances
0 Comments