K.P. Prabhakaran vs Bhasurangan

V. Chitambaresh, J.—The suit is one for return of the advance amount pursuant to an agreement for sale. The sole defendant raised a plea of non joinder of necessary parties in the written statement. The defendant contended that two others are the owners of the property agreed to be conveyed under the suit agreement. The plaintiff thereupon sought to implead those persons as additional defendants 2 and 3 in the suit. That has been turned down by the order impugned by the court below. The application put in by the plaintiff was solely for impleadment. This was necessitated in view of the plea of non-joinder raised by the defendant in the suit.

It is of course true that impleadment of additional persons may necessitate amendment of the plaint. But that is hardly a reason to refuse impleadment under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The order of the court refusing impleadment of persons as additional defendants 2 and 3 in the suit is bad in law. The impugned order is set aside and I.A.No.1131 of 2012 in O.S.No.44 of 2010 on the file of the court of the Subordinate Judge of Pathanamthitta is allowed. The original Petition is allowed. No costs.