Bombay High Court Allows Impleadment Application in Suit for Declaration and Injunction — Members of Housing Society Seek to Protect Rights in Property Dispute. The court held that members of a co-operative housing society are proper parties to a suit involving the society's property and allowed their impleadment under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, subject to conditions to avoid delay.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Accused
  • 20
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The present application was filed by 61 members of Pariwar Co-operative Housing Society Limited seeking impleadment in a suit filed by Nitin Chandrakant Patel, the sole proprietor of M/s. Mahalaxmi Land Development, against the society and its office bearers. The plaintiff sought a declaration that the society had no right, title, or interest in the suit property and a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's possession. The applicants contended that they were members of the society and had a direct interest in the property, as any decree against the society would affect their rights. The court, after hearing both sides, held that the applicants were proper parties to the suit as their rights would be directly affected by the outcome. However, to avoid delay, the court directed that the applicants would not be permitted to file additional written statements or lead evidence beyond what was already on record, and they would be bound by the proceedings. The application was allowed with these conditions.

Headnote

A) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 1 Rule 10 - Impleadment - Necessary and Proper Party - Members of a co-operative housing society sought impleadment in a suit filed by a developer against the society and its office bearers for declaration and injunction - The court held that the applicants, being members of the society, have a direct interest in the subject matter of the suit as any decree against the society would affect their rights in the property - The court allowed the application, directing that the applicants be added as defendants, but clarified that they would not be entitled to file additional written statements or lead evidence beyond what is already on record, and would be bound by the proceedings (Paras 1-10).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the applicants, who are members of the defendant society, are necessary or proper parties to the suit and entitled to be impleaded as defendants.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The application is allowed. The applicants are directed to be added as defendants to the suit. However, they shall not be entitled to file additional written statements or lead evidence beyond what is already on record, and they shall be bound by the proceedings.

Law Points

  • Order 1 Rule 10 CPC
  • Impleadment
  • Necessary and Proper Party
  • Right to be Heard
  • Co-operative Housing Society
  • Members' Rights
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (BOM) (09) 110

Interim Application (L) No. 15430 of 2022 in Suit No. 273 of 2021

2025-09-16

2025:BHC-OS:15233

Mr. S. S. Bedekar a/w Mr. M. Limaye for the applicants; Mr. Rohan Cama a/w Mr. Amod, Ms. Ayushi and Mr. A. A. for the plaintiff

Sudesh Gurudas Jotkar and 60 Others

Nitin Chandrakant Patel

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil suit for declaration and permanent injunction

Remedy Sought

The applicants sought to be impleaded as defendants in the suit to protect their rights as members of the defendant society.

Filing Reason

The applicants believed that their rights in the suit property would be affected by the outcome of the suit and they were not adequately represented by the existing defendants.

Issues

Whether the applicants are necessary or proper parties to the suit under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC.

Submissions/Arguments

The applicants argued that they are members of the defendant society and have a direct interest in the property, and any decree against the society would affect their rights. The plaintiff opposed the application, contending that the applicants are not necessary parties and their impleadment would delay the proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

Members of a co-operative housing society have a direct interest in the property of the society and are proper parties to a suit involving the society's property. Their impleadment under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC is permissible to protect their rights, but subject to conditions to avoid delay.

Judgment Excerpts

The applicants are members of the defendant society and have a direct interest in the subject matter of the suit. Any decree passed against the society would affect the rights of the applicants. The applicants are proper parties to the suit and their impleadment is necessary for the complete and effective adjudication of the dispute.

Procedural History

The suit was filed by the plaintiff against the society and its office bearers. The applicants filed the present application seeking impleadment. The court heard both sides and passed the order allowing the application with conditions.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order 1 Rule 10
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Impleadment Application in Suit for Declaration and Injunction — Members of Housing Society Seek to Protect Rights in Property Dispute. The court held that members of a co-operative housing society are proper parties to a s...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Appeal Against Dismissal of Suit for Non-Prosecution Due to Prior Waiver of Service. The Court held that the Trial Court erred in dismissing the suit when the defendant corporation had already been directed to waive service b...