Legal provisions involved: Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; Companies Act, 1956; Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

Judgement by: Supreme Court of India

Judge/Bench: Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Prasanna B. Varale

Facts

The owners of a commercial property filed a suit to recover pending service charges from a partnership firm, M/s Kishore Engineering Company. NAK Engineering Company Pvt. Ltd. later claimed that it had taken over the firm’s business and asked to be added as a party to the case. The Trial Court allowed this request. The High Court disagreed and removed the company from the case. NAK Engineering then approached the Supreme Court.

Key legal provisions

• Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 
• Companies Act, 1956
• Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

Issues raised

Whether NAK Engineering was a necessary or proper party to the suit and whether the High Court was justified in interfering with the Trial Court’s order.

Arguments of the case

 NAK Engineering said it was the successor of the firm and should be heard. The property owners argued that no claim was made against the company and it was added only after a long delay.

Judgement

The Supreme Court ruled that NAK Engineering was not required for deciding the case and was also not relevant enough to be added as a party. Since the recovery suit was filed only against the partnership firm, the company could not insist on being included in the case against the wishes of the plaintiff.

Click here to VIEW the full judgement.