https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313103 A transferee pendente lite seeking impleadment in writ proceedings was not treated as a necessary or proper party under the guiding principle of Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC, because the dispute could be effectively decided without his presence. The Court noted that the applicant derived title through the vendor, would be bound by the result affecting that vendor's rights, and showed no substantiated collusion. The writ petitioner, as dominus litis, could not be forced to add a person merely because that person claimed an interest in the subject-matter. The application for impleadment was rejected and the proceedings continued without the applicants as co-respondents. en-us Mon, 29 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Mar 2024 13:28:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313103 A transferee pendente lite seeking impleadment in writ proceedings was not treated as a necessary or proper party under the guiding principle of Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC, because the dispute could be effectively decided without his presence. The Court noted that the applicant derived title through the vendor, would be bound by the result affecting that vendor's rights, and showed no substantiated collusion. The writ petitioner, as dominus litis, could not be forced to add a person merely because that person claimed an interest in the subject-matter. The application for impleadment was rejected and the proceedings continued without the applicants as co-respondents. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 29 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313103