https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313640 Punjab and Haryana HC dismissed revision petitions challenging trial court's order allowing impleading of respondent as party under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC in specific performance suit. Court held that despite no privity of contract between petitioner-plaintiff and respondent, and no relief claimed against him, respondent's presence was necessary for complete adjudication as his rights would be affected since he also sought specific performance of agreement for same land. Following Thomson Press precedent, court ruled respondent was proper party whose presence enabled effective adjudication of all matters, making impleading order legally sound. en-us Thu, 18 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Apr 2024 20:51:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313640 Punjab and Haryana HC dismissed revision petitions challenging trial court's order allowing impleading of respondent as party under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC in specific performance suit. Court held that despite no privity of contract between petitioner-plaintiff and respondent, and no relief claimed against him, respondent's presence was necessary for complete adjudication as his rights would be affected since he also sought specific performance of agreement for same land. Following Thomson Press precedent, court ruled respondent was proper party whose presence enabled effective adjudication of all matters, making impleading order legally sound. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 18 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313640