HUSSAIN DAWOOD vs Haji MAQBOOL AHMED O — 2023 PLD 293 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

HUSSAIN DAWOOD VS Haji MAQBOOL AHMED O. I, R. 10---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 O. 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 Code, 1908 was allowed, 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 consequences of such proceedings and also by incurring heavy 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 O. 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---Appeal was disposed of accordingly.

HUSSAIN DAWOOD vs Haji MAQBOOL AHMED O — 2023 PLD 293 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 PLD