Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (2.44 seconds)Vineeta Sharma vs Rakesh Sharma on 11 August, 2020
6. It is clear and forthcoming from the
aforementioned that the proposed defendants claim through
defendants 1 to 3 and the suit property having been converted
and sold as sites, any other passed by the Trial Court in the suit
would affect the rights of the proposed defendants 7 to 62. It is
further pertinent to note that the plaintiff herself having filed
I.A.No.8 to implead the proposed defendants 7 to 62 and the
plaintiff being a dominus litis, the Trial Court was justified in
noticing that the plaintiff being a daughter of the propositus,
having a right in the suit property in view of the judgment of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vineeta Sharma v.
Rakesh Sharma and others3, the proposed defendants are
necessary parties in order to decide the rights of the parties in
the suit and that without making the proposed defendants as
parties to the suit, the decree cannot be effectively executed.
3
AIR 2020 SC 3717
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 151 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
1