CPC Order 1 Rule 10: Provisions Of Adding or Removing Parties in Civil Proceedings

Introduction 

The Civil Procedure Code 1908 (CPC), is a procedural law, that governs civil litigation in India. In civil litigation, all necessary parties must required for the adjudication of a suit. CPC Order 1 Rule 10 deals with adding or removing a party in a suit. The provision of Order 1 Rule 10 gives authority to the court to add or remove the parties to the suit at any stage to adjudicate the real dispute. 

In this article, we discuss, the meaning and importance of this clause and when the court can allow the addition or removal of parties to the suit under Order 1 Rule 1o of the CPC. 

What is CPC Order 1 Rule 10?

Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC refers to the procedure for adding or removing the parties in a civil suit. The aim of the provision is to prevent the multiplicity of proceedings and resolve the real dispute between all existing parties in the court. 

CPC Order 1 Rule 10 has the following sub-rules:

Rule 10 (1): The suit cannot be dismissed on the ground of misjoinder or non-joinder of parties. The court may deal with the issue of controversial rights and interests of the parties present before it. 

Rule 10 (2): According to the provision of this rule, the court has discretionary power to strike out or add parties to the suit if necessary to meet the end of justice. The court can order either an application filed by a party or without. 

Rule 10 (4): According to the provision of this rule when a new party is added as a defendant. When a new party is added to a suit, the proceeding begins with them. The plaint shall be amended according to that and a fresh copy will be provided to the new defendant. 

Who can be added or removed as a party under Order 1 Rule 10?

We refer to the provision of Order 1 Rule 10 that applies to two parties: 

The proper party and the necessary party.

Here the necessary party means a party in the absence of the effective decree cannot be passed by the court. A proper party means a party, whose presence aids in effectively resolving real disputes of the suit. 

Under the provision of CPC Oder 1 Rule 10 (2), the court has the power to decide the question of the necessary or proper party in a suit. The court also has the discretionary power to pass an appropriate order to add or remove a party to the adjudication of a suit. The court observes various factors to use its discretionary power such as determining the nature of the dispute, the reliefs prayed by the parties, legal necessity of a party for natural justice. 

Case laws under the provision of Order 1 Rule 10 CPC:

Let’s refer to some case laws that interpret the 

In  Lala Durga Prasad and Anr. v. Lala Deep Chand & Ors., (1954 SCR 360), The Supreme Court rightly observed that a subsequent purchaser is a necessary party in a suit for specific performance.[1]. 

In Ramesh Hirachand Kundanmal vs. Municipal Corporation (1992 AIR SCW 846). The Court rightly observed that a proper party can be added for the purpose of avoiding a multiplicity of litigation.[2].

In Anil Kumar Singh vs. Shivnath Mishra (AIRONLINE 1994 SC 245). The Court concluded that the unnecessary party can be removed to avoid procedural complications in litigation.[3].

What is the procedure for adding or removing a party?

Several steps require completing to add or remove a party, such as, 

CPC Order 1 Rule 10 Provisions Of Adding or Removing Parties in Civil Proceedings

Steps for adding a party:

  • Adding a new party to a suit either the plaintiff or existing party can file an application under the provision of CPC Order 1 Rule 10.
  • The application should be filed with a detailed reason, why a party needs to be added to a suit. 
  • After filing of an application the court hears the applicant and observes whether such party is required as necessary or proper. 
  • If the court thinks fit to grant that application may pass the necessary order to add a party to a suit, and issue notice to the new party. 

Steps for removing a party:

  • Either an existing party can file an application, or in some cases, the court can use its suo motu power. 
  • The court observes if the party is unnecessary or not. 
  • If the court observes there is no valid role of the party involved in a suit that can be ordered to be removed. 

Advantages and disadvantages of Order 1 Rule 10 CPC

Some benefits and risk factors need to be known while determining adding or removing a party in a suit, such as,

Benefits of adding a party in a suit:

  • This ensures all effective parties are involved in litigation. 
  • This reduces the chance of a multiplicity of proceedings. 
  • The court can resolve the real disputes between effective parties. 

Risks of the unnecessary party in a suit:

  • This may lead to an extension of litigation.
  • This may result in rising litigation costs. 
  • This may result in unnecessary delay in justice. 

Differences between Order 1 Rule 10 and Order 1 Rule 9

The provisions of Order 1 Rule 10 and Order 1 Rule 9 seem the same. But, there is a difference between them. Order 1 rule 10 is related to the adding or removing parties. While Order 1 Rule 9 deals with misjoinder or non-joinder of parties, according to this provision the suit cannot dismissed on that ground, unless the necessary party missing. The main purpose of these rules is to prevent procedural defects in the way of justice. 

Conclusion 

Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC plays a significant role in civil litigation. This provision allows for the addition or removal of party at any stage during the suit proceedings. Through, these provisions the court can decide a real dispute between effective parties. Either existing party of a suit can file an application under this provision. In some cases, the court can use its discretionary power to determine the proper and necessary parties to meet the fair and natural justice, and avoid unnecessary multiplicity of proceedings. 

Reference 

(1) Lala Durga Prasad and Anr. v. Lala Deep Chand & Ors., (1954 SCR 360).

(2) Ramesh Hirachand Kundanmal vs. Municipal Corporation (1992 AIR SCW 846).

(3) Anil Kumar Singh vs. Shivnath Mishra (AIRONLINE 1994 SC 245).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *