Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8.                The appellant filed an application for impleading GSBC during the appeal. It has not been impleaded in the complaint, when evidence was led and trial was held. This application has been filed at quite belated stage by the appellant. The appellant was very much aware of this fact that GSBC is a separate legal entity from OPs and law does not come to rescue of sleeping persons. Undoubtedly, as held by Kerala High Court in "Abraham versus Joseph" reported in 2002(3) RCR (Civil) 497 the application for transposing by petitioner, as an appellant cannot be rejected, when filed in an appeal. This is not a case of transposing, but GSBC was not impleaded at all by the complainant in this case. The complainant has separate agreement with GSBC which is a distinct entity from OPs and complainant has separate cause of action against it.  It would not be appropriate to plead it at the belated stage of the case in appeal. Otherwise, purpose of summary proceedings for adjudication of the case under Consumer Protection Act, would be defeated. However, the appellant has separate cause of action against GSBC  and can avail his remedy against it thereunder. Hence, application of the appellant stands rejected for impleading GSBC as a party at appellate stage.