1958 (9) TMI 103 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
- Whether the judgment-debtor and joint decree-holder are necessary parties to the appeal under Order XXI, Rule 63, C.P.C.
- Whether the appeal can proceed in the absence of the judgment-debtor and joint decree-holder.

Analysis:
1. The case involved a second appeal against the judgment and decree of the trial court dismissing the appeal on a preliminary issue due to vital parties not being made party-respondents.
2. The suit arose under Order XXI, Rule 63, C.P.C., where the plaintiff, a decree-holder, contested a claim case by the defendant No. 2, appellant, under Order XXI, Rule 58 C.P.C.
3. The plaintiff alleged collusion between the judgment-debtor, defendant No. 1, and the zamindars, leading to a sham sale where defendant No. 2 was the purchaser.
4. The trial court found in favor of the plaintiff, concluding that the properties belonged to the judgment-debtor, not defendant No. 2.
5. The main issue was whether the judgment-debtor and joint decree-holder were necessary parties to the appeal, as their absence could lead to inconsistent decrees.
6. The appellant argued that the judgment-debtor was not a necessary party based on legal precedents, but the court held that in this case, the judgment-debtor's presence was crucial for a consistent outcome.
7. The court emphasized that the absence of the joint decree-holder, defendant No. 4, in the appeal also rendered it incompetent, as the trial court's decision involved both the plaintiff and defendant No. 4.
8. Referring to a Supreme Court decision, the court highlighted that technical rules of impleading parties should not apply rigidly, but in this case, the absence of crucial parties would lead to inconsistent outcomes.
9. The court rejected the argument that the delay in making the joint decree-holder a party was due to legal advice, stating that the responsibility lies with the party to ensure all necessary parties are included.
10. In conclusion, the second appeal was dismissed, emphasizing the importance of including all necessary parties for a consistent and valid legal proceeding.