Order 1 Rule 10 CPC | Impleadment Of Parties Need Not Be Allowed If It Would Lead To Multiplicity Of Proceedings: Telangana High Court
The Telangana High Court in a recent case held that the impleadment of parties was not required in the case as the parties in impleadment applications were already being effectively represented in the suit for cancellation of Sale Deed. The petitioner submitted that Respondent society without having any right and title over the schedule property, executed many sale deeds intentionally to derail the proceedings and to defeat the legitimate right of the petitioner and if they filed petitions in batches it would result in gross miscarriage of justice. In Pankajbhai Rameshbhai Zalavadiya v. Jethabhai Kalabhai Zalavadiya,, it was held that Order 1 Rule 10 CPC enabled the Court to add any party at any stage of the proceedings, if his presence was necessary in order for the Court to effectively and completely adjudicate upon the questions involved in the suit. The revision petitioner submitted that there were 2000 plot owners of the Society and if they all went on filing implead petitions, the suit proceedings would never be concluded. Court's Ruling Justice P. Sree Sudha held that undoubtedly a petition for impleadment of proper and necessary parties can be filed at any stage of proceedings but in the case on hand, the plot owners' welfare organization was representing on their behalf effectively and as such again each individual plot owner need not come on record by way of filing implead applications.


![Telangana High Court Annual Digest 2024 [PART II]](/static/images/error.jpg)
![Telangana High Court Annual Digest 2024 [PART I]](/static/images/error.jpg)
![Complete Supreme Court Quarterly Digest 2024- [January To March]](/static/images/error.jpg)









Discover Related

Govt may file review plea on Supreme Court timelines for President, Governors to clear bills

SC dismisses adoption deed in property dispute, says meant to oust daughters from rightful inheritance

Indirect Tax Quarterly Digest: January - March, 2025

HC admits PG medico’s plea against rural service

HC turns serious over fabricated orders brought by private parties

Bhu Bharati by April 14: Ponguleti

Value Of Land Under Works Contract Is Not Exigible To VAT: Karnataka High Court

Kerala HC orders to attach properties of banned PFI to recover hartal damages

Delay in lodging complaint with cops raises doubts: Telangana HC
