Skip to content


Pandit Rup Chand Vs. Fateh Chand and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Judge
Reported in6Ind.Cas.36
AppellantPandit Rup Chand
RespondentFateh Chand and ors.
Excerpt:
civil procedure code (act v of 1908), order 1, rule 10 - adding of parties to suit--person only indirectly interested--power of court--jurisdiction, question of. - - in the present case, we are satisfied from the arguments that the parties who are added are parties who are not directly interested in the issues between rup chand and fateh chand, but are only indirectly affected......and fateh chand, but are only indirectly affected. if any injury occurs to them, it really is the result of their act. the matter being a matter of jurisdiction we allow the application and set aside the order of the court dated the 24th of may 1909. the name of the parties added by the court below will now be struck out of the array of parties. the petitioners will get the cost of this revision, with fees in this court on the higher scale, from respondents nos. 2,3,4 & 5 and not from respondent no. 1.
Judgment:

1. This is an application for the revision of an order passed by the Subordinate Judge of Saharanpur, whereby he has allowed the application made by certain persons, Musammat Makandi, Musammat Lachmi Kuer and others praying that they may be added as parties to a suit pending in this Court between one Pandit Rup Chand and one Fateh Chand. The order under which these persons have been added as parties is Order 1, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The words of the order are identical with those of Order 16, Rule 11 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of 1883 and they have been interpreted in the case of Moser v. Marsden (1812) 1 Ch. D. 487 : 61 L.J. Ch. 319 : 66 L. 570 : 40 W.R. 520; in that caseitwas held that the addition of parties who are only indirectly affected and not directly interested in the issues between the plaintiff and the defendant is a question of jurisdiction; and the Court has no power to add persons only indirectly interested as parties to the suit. In the present case, we are satisfied from the arguments that the parties who are added are parties who are not directly interested in the issues between Rup Chand and Fateh Chand, but are only indirectly affected. If any injury occurs to them, it really is the result of their act. The matter being a matter of jurisdiction we allow the application and set aside the order of the Court dated the 24th of May 1909. The name of the parties added by the Court below will now be struck out of the array of parties. The petitioners will get the cost of this revision, with fees in this Court on the higher scale, from respondents Nos. 2,3,4 & 5 and not from respondent No. 1.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //