Introduction:
In civil litigation, joinder of parties in a suit is a crucial factor. Because of a lack of proper joinder or the failure to include necessary parties, a suit may fail to succeed. There is a legal framework that governs the joinder of parties in civil litigation under the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. The provisions of Orders I and II of CPC deal with the parties of suits, as well as joinder and misjoinder of parties. In this article, we address what the Joinder of Parties under the Civil Procedure Code is, Parties to Suit, Joinder of defendants, what is necessary and proper parties, misjoinder and non-joinder of parties in a suit, etc.
What are Parties to the Suit?
The Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order I deals with the parties to suits, such as joinder, non-joinder of parties, and joinder of causes of action. The provision aims to ensure that all relevant parties are implied or present in the suit, so the court can adjudicate the subject matter effectively. Let’s understand in detail below:
Joinder of Parties
Joinder of parties means inclusion of multiple plaintiffs or defendants in a single lawsuit.
Joinder of Plaintiffs:
Order I, Rule I of CPC sets the conditions under which multiple persons can be joined as plaintiffs in a single suit: these are given below:
Right to Relief:
Right to relief refers to the plaintiff having a right to relief related to the subject matter, stemming from a similar act or transaction.
Common Question of Law and Fact:
If any separate suits arise by the parties as plaintiffs, they will involve a common question of law and fact.
Joinder of Defendants:
Order I, Rule 3 of CPC sets the conditions under which multiple persons can be joined as defendants in a single suit: these are given below:
Right to Relief:
Right to relief refers to the fact that the defendants must have been involved in relation to the same subject matter, same act, or transactions.
Common Question of Law and Fact:
If any separate suits arise by the plaintiff against the defendants involve a common question of law and fact.
Necessary and Proper Party in a suit:
There are some key terms that determine the necessary and proper parties in a suit, which are given below:
Necessary Party:
Necessary parties refer to those persons whose presence and involvement are essentially required in the suit proceedings. In the absence of that party, the court cannot adjudicate the real subject matter. It is also difficult for the court to pass a final verdict effectively.
Proper Party:
Proper party refers to those persons whose presence and involvement are not essentially required for passing an effective final decree of a suit.
Misjoinder and Non-joinder of parties:
Order 1 Rule 9 of the CPC deals with Misjoinder and Non-joinder of parties in a lawsuit. The key factors determining these are given below:
Misjoinder of Party:
If two or more persons wrongfully joined as plaintiffs or defendants, they are not considered as proper or necessary parties according to the provision of Order I, Rule I and 3. It is treated as a misjoinder of parties.
Non-joinder of Party:
When the necessary party is not joined in a suit, the court cannot pass an effective decree in the absence of that party. The suit can be dismissed due to the non-joinder of a party.
Striking Out, Adding or Substituting Parties:
The Civil Procedure Code,1908, Order I, Rule 10 deals with stringing out, adding, or substituting parties in a civil suit. The aim of this rule is to determine the subject matter of a suit effectively, and the court can allow altering parties involved if it thinks fit. There are some specific conditions that need to be met for altering parties, which are given below:
· The substitution or addition of parties is necessarily required to determine the subject matter of the suit.
· If the suit is filed by the wrong person as a plaintiff, and that mistake is considered bona fide.
· If a person has not joined as a plaintiff or defendant, which is necessarily required to be joined.
· If, without adding that person as a party, the court cannot adjudicate the real dispute or pass an effective decree.
· At any stage of the proceedings, the court can allow an amendment with some specific terms. However, one thing we should note is that no person can be added as a plaintiff without their consent.
Judicial interpretation related to the joinder of parties
In Benares Bank Ltd vs Bhagwandas, the Allahabad High Court ruled that the parties to the suit must satisfy that they have a right to relief. As well, without them, the court cannot resolve the case effectively.
In Canara Bank vs Mettalica Industries Ltd, the Bombay High Court rightly observed that the plaintiff is not bound to implead those parties who are not necessary or proper to adjudicate the subject matter of the suit.
In Anil Kumar Singh vs Shiv Nath Mishra, the Supreme Court held that the aim of the rule is that all concerned persons related to the suit dispute need to be present at the same time to avoid multiplicity of proceedings.
In J.S. Yadav v. State of U.P., the Supreme Court rightly observed that if the necessary party is not impleaded in a suit, it may result in the dismissal of the suit.
In Babulal Khandelwal v. Balkishan D. Sanghvi, the Supreme Court concluded that, in the suit of administration of an estate of a deceased person, the person who is involved in the transaction of such estate may be impleaded as a necessary party.
In Laxmi Shankar v. Yash Ram Vasta, the Supreme Court held that the one co-owner can maintain an eviction suit if the other co-owners have no object.
Conclusion
The CPC Orders I and II play a crucial role in defining the joinder of parties in a civil litigation. Basically, these rules define misjoinder, non-joinder, and joinder of parties in a lawsuit. The aim of this rule is that the court can effectively adjudicate the real dispute between the parties. These provisions also allow adding or removing parties if that is required in the course of natural and fair justice. As a result, it can help to prevent multiplicity of proceedings between the parties, and save the time, cost and energy of litigants and the judiciary.