https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461549 A person in actual possession of the suit property may be treated as a necessary and proper party where absence from the suit could leave the decree ineffective and lead to execution disputes or further litigation. Even after commencement of trial, amendment of the plaint and impleadment may be permitted if the plaintiff was not shown to know the internal possession arrangement and the interests of justice require it. The proviso to Order VI Rule 17 did not bar relief on these facts, and the refusal of impleadment and amendment was set aside, with the applications allowed on costs. en-us Mon, 23 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 12 Apr 2025 14:41:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461549 A person in actual possession of the suit property may be treated as a necessary and proper party where absence from the suit could leave the decree ineffective and lead to execution disputes or further litigation. Even after commencement of trial, amendment of the plaint and impleadment may be permitted if the plaintiff was not shown to know the internal possession arrangement and the interests of justice require it. The proviso to Order VI Rule 17 did not bar relief on these facts, and the refusal of impleadment and amendment was set aside, with the applications allowed on costs. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 23 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461549