Unconditional withdrawal of a suit is complete on intimation to the court, without leave, even against one defendant.

Order XXIII Rule 1 permits a plaintiff to abandon a suit or any part of the claim against all or any defendants. Unconditional withdrawal is complete when the plaintiff intimates the court by filing a purshis or withdrawal application, and it does not depend on a formal order granting permission. The court may record the withdrawal and address costs, but it cannot refuse withdrawal merely because the defendant sought to be dropped is said to be a necessary party. If necessary parties are absent, the court may consider only the effect on the continuation of the suit against the remaining defendants.

---

---

Issues: Whether a plaintiff has an unconditional right to withdraw a suit, including withdrawal against one or more defendants, without leave of the Court.

Analysis: Order XXIII Rule 1 permits a plaintiff to abandon the suit or any part of the claim against all or any of the defendants. An unconditional withdrawal is complete when the plaintiff intimates the Court by filing a purshis or application of withdrawal, and the withdrawal is not dependent on a formal order permitting it. The Court may record the withdrawal and deal with costs, but it cannot refuse withdrawal merely because the person against whom the suit is sought to be withdrawn is alleged to be a necessary party. If necessary parties are absent, the Court may consider the effect on the survival of the suit against the remaining defendants.

Conclusion: The plaintiff had the right to unconditionally withdraw the suit against respondent no. 1, and the withdrawal became effective on filing of the purshis.

Ratio Decidendi: A plaintiff's unconditional withdrawal of a suit or claim against any defendant is complete upon intimation to the Court, and the Court cannot refuse such withdrawal on the ground that the defendant sought to be dropped is a necessary party.

---