Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, who are defendants in O.S. No. 224/2014 pending before the II Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Raichur, filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 11.01.2022 on IA-24. The respondent No. 1 (plaintiff) had filed the suit seeking a declaration of absolute ownership of suit properties and for setting aside certain registered sale deeds. During the pendency of the suit, defendant No. 2 died. The petitioners (defendants) filed an application to bring on record the legal representatives of the deceased defendant No. 2. The trial court rejected the application, treating it as one under Order 22 Rule 4 CPC, on the ground that the application was not filed by the plaintiff but by the defendants. The High Court examined the provisions of Order 22 Rule 4 and Order 1 Rule 10 CPC. It held that Order 22 Rule 4 CPC applies only to the plaintiff and deals with the consequence of abatement if the plaintiff fails to bring legal representatives of a deceased defendant. It does not apply to an application by a defendant seeking to implead legal representatives of another defendant. The proper provision for such an application is Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, which empowers the court to add any person as a party at any stage of the proceedings if his presence is necessary for the complete adjudication of the dispute. The High Court set aside the impugned order and directed the trial court to consider the application afresh under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, after hearing all parties, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. The writ petition was allowed.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure Code - Impleadment of Legal Representatives - Order 22 Rule 4 vs Order 1 Rule 10 - The trial court rejected an application filed by defendants to bring on record the legal representatives of a deceased co-defendant, treating it as one under Order 22 Rule 4 CPC. The High Court held that Order 22 Rule 4 CPC applies only to plaintiffs and not to defendants. The application ought to have been considered under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, which allows the court to add any person as a party at any stage. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration. (Paras 3-6) B) Civil Procedure Code - Abatement of Suit - Order 22 Rule 4 - The court clarified that Order 22 Rule 4 CPC deals with the procedure where a plaintiff fails to bring legal representatives of a deceased defendant, leading to abatement of the suit against that defendant. It does not apply to an application by a defendant seeking to implead legal representatives of another defendant. (Para 4) C) Civil Procedure Code - Power of Court to Add Parties - Order 1 Rule 10 - The court observed that Order 1 Rule 10 CPC confers wide discretion on the court to add any person as a party whose presence is necessary for the complete and final adjudication of the dispute. The trial court ought to have considered the application under this provision. (Para 5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court was justified in rejecting the application filed by the petitioners (defendants) to bring on record the legal representatives of the deceased defendant No. 2, by treating it as one under Order 22 Rule 4 CPC, instead of considering it under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order dated 11.01.2022, and directed the trial court to consider IA-24 afresh under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, after hearing all parties, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Order 22 Rule 4 CPC applies only to plaintiffs
- not defendants
- Order 1 Rule 10 CPC is the proper provision for impleading legal representatives of deceased defendants
- Rejection of application under Order 22 Rule 4 CPC for impleading legal representatives of defendants is erroneous
- Trial court must consider application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC on merits
