Jameel Ahmed vs Hayat Muhammad Sher Pao O — 2024 MLD 1337 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.

Jameel Ahmed VS Hayat Muhammad Sher Pao O.I, R.10---Necessary and proper party---Scope---Appellant filed an application under O. I, R. 10 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, in a suit instituted by the private respondents against the official respondents---Said application was dismissed and meanwhile the suit was decreed---Appellants pleaded that the subject land was acquired by them on requisite payments and they were necessary and proper party---Validity---Record reflected that the private respondents, who had filed instant suit had also filed a constitutional petition against some of the respondents including appellant No.1 and his predecessor, which was coming up and/or being fixed with present appeals---In said petition they (private respondents / plaintiffs of suit) had sought a declaration that the exchange of land was illegal and unlawful---While they impleaded the appellant No.1 and his predecessors in the petition, they (private respondents) mischievously had not arrayed appellants and/or appellant No.1 at least and/or his predecessor in interest in the civil suit and in this manner had attempted to obtain a judgment and decree in collusion with the official respondents and in fact succeeded---On acquiring knowledge before decree could be passed, the appellants moved application under O. I, R. 10, C.P.C. on which the impugned order was passed whereby summarily not only was it dismissed but the suit was also decreed on the same date despite the fact that two written statements of official respondents, out of four, were yet to be served---Incidentally one of the written statements had opposed the claim of the private respondents/plaintiff of the suit O. 1, R. 10(2), C.P.C. demands that name of the person who ought to have been joined, whether as plaintiff or defendant, or whose presence before the Court may be necessary in order to enable the Court effectually and completely to adjudicate upon and settle all questions involved in the suit, be added, but in the present case, such aspect was not given due consideration---Party has to only present a reasonable case for the indulgence of the Court, which could disclose interest in the property, which could be sufficient for the Court to add him/ them as party, which was done by the appellants in the present case----High Court set aside the impugned orders and the judgments and remanded the matter to Single Judge---Resultantly, the application under O. I, R. 10, C.P.C. was deemed to be pending before the Single Judge who shall then pass orders on it in accordance with law after providing opportunity of hearing to all the parties after notice---Appeals were allowed accordingly.

Jameel Ahmed vs Hayat Muhammad Sher Pao O — 2024 MLD 1337 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 MLD