Transposition Of Parties Under Crpc
Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC enables the Court to add any person as a party at
any stage of the proceedings, if the person whose presence in Court is necessary
in order to enable the Court to effectively and completely adjudicate upon and
settle all the questions involved in the suit.
Avoidance of multiplicity of
proceedings is also one of the objects of the said provision. Order 1 Rule 10 of
the CPC, empowers the Court to substitute a party in the suit who is a wrong
person with a right person. If the Court is satisfied that, the suit has been
instituted through a bona fide mistake, and also that it is necessary for the
determination of the real matter in controversy to substitute a party in the
suit, it may direct it to be done.
When the Court finds that, in the absence of
the persons sought to be impleaded as a party to the suit, the controversy
raised in the suit cannot be effectively and completely settled, the Court would
do justice by impleading such persons. Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the CPC gives wide
discretion to the Court to deal with such a situation which may result in
prejudicing the interests of the affected party if not impleaded in the suit,
and where the impleadment of the said party is necessary and vital for the
decision of the suit.
There is no bar for filing the application under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC, even
when the application under Order 22 Rule 4 of the CPC was dismissed as not
maintainable under the facts of the case. The legal heirs of the deceased person
in such a matter can be added in the array of parties under Order 1 Rule 10 of
the Code read with Section 151 of the Code subject to the plea of limitation as
contemplated under Order 7 Rule 6 of the Code and Section 21 of the Limitation
Act, to be decided during the course of trial.
The transposition of a defendant as plaintiff is permitted to be made only in
two happenings. It is well settled that the Court has power under Sub-rule (2)
Order 1, Rule 10, CPC to transfer a defendant to the category of plaintiffs and
where the plaintiff agrees, such transposition should be readily made.
In the matter of: Anil Kumar Singh V/s Shivnath Mishra, (1995) 3 SCC 147,
it was held that, the object of Rule 10 of Order I of the CPC is to bring on
record all the persons who are parties to the dispute relating to the
subject-matter so that the dispute may be determined in their presence at the
same time without any protraction, inconvenience and to avoid multiplicity of
This Court in the case of Karuppaswamy and Ors. v. C. Ramamurthy, has
permitted the Plaintiff to modify the application filed by him under Order 22
Rule 4 of the CPC, to make it an application under the provisions of Sections
151 and 153 of the CPC. In the said matter also the suit was filed against a
dead person. This Court proceeded further to conclude that the Plaintiff has
shown good faith as contemplated Under Section 21(1) of Limitation Act and hence
the impleadment of the legal representatives/heirs must date back to the date of
the presentation of the plaint.
Law Article in India
You May Like
Legal Question & Answers