Nagappa Vs. Dodda Bharamappa & Anr.
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. 1954 of 2000
(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 15945 of 1999)
Petitioner: Nagappa
Respondent: Dodda Bharamappa & Anr.
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 1954 of 2000
(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 15945 of 1999)
Judges: S.B. MAJMUDAR & RUMA PAL, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Jun 03, 2000
Head Note:
CIVIL LAWS
Civil Procedure Code, 1908
Order 1, Rule 10 – Landlord- tenant relationship – Suit by Appellant against alleged tenant pending in Harihar – Suit by Respondents against the Appellants for permanent injunction pending at Davangare – Respondents moving an application for impleading them as parties – Trial court allowing the application – High Court confirming the trial court’s order – Whether Respondents necessary or proper parties in a suit between the Appellant and his alleged tenant. Held. No. But in the interest of justice both the matters clubbed at Davangare.
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties finally in this appeal.
3. In our view, in the suit between the landlord and tenant there was no occasion for the Respondents to be joined as party Respondent. Learned Counsel for Respondents stated that Respondents have already filed a suit in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Davangare against the Appellant for permanent injunc-tion. According to him, the suit filed by the Appellant against the so-called tenant on the basis of the rent note is a collusive one. Be that as it may, in a suit between the Appellant and his alleged tenant, the Respondents cannot be said to be necessary or proper parties. However, as their suit on title and injunction is pending in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Davangare and the rent suit filed by the Appellant against his alleged tenant on the basis of rent note dated 4.11.1997 is pending in the Court of Civil Judge ( Junior Division) & J.M.F.C., Harihar, while allowing this appeal and setting aside the impugned order passed by the High Court and also by the learned trial court on I.A. No. 3, interest of justice will be served if the civil suit No. O.S. 23 of 1999 pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) & J.M.F.C., Harihar be transferred to the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Davangare and be analogously tried along with Respondents’ Suit No. O.S. 8/1998. Ordered accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.
1. Leave granted.
2. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties finally in this appeal.
3. In our view, in the suit between the landlord and tenant there was no occasion for the Respondents to be joined as party Respondent. Learned Counsel for Respondents stated that Respondents have already filed a suit in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Davangare against the Appellant for permanent injunc-tion. According to him, the suit filed by the Appellant against the so-called tenant on the basis of the rent note is a collusive one. Be that as it may, in a suit between the Appellant and his alleged tenant, the Respondents cannot be said to be necessary or proper parties. However, as their suit on title and injunction is pending in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Davangare and the rent suit filed by the Appellant against his alleged tenant on the basis of rent note dated 4.11.1997 is pending in the Court of Civil Judge ( Junior Division) & J.M.F.C., Harihar, while allowing this appeal and setting aside the impugned order passed by the High Court and also by the learned trial court on I.A. No. 3, interest of justice will be served if the civil suit No. O.S. 23 of 1999 pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) & J.M.F.C., Harihar be transferred to the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Davangare and be analogously tried along with Respondents’ Suit No. O.S. 8/1998. Ordered accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.
