Bombay HC: Parties to be ‘Necessary Party’ or ‘Proper Party’ for Impleadment


June 04, 2018

Case name: Janak Dilip Dwarkadas v. The Joint Charity Commissioner & ors.

The   controversy   in   the   present   case pertained to impleadment of the petitioner as a party­ respondent to the revision application filed by respondent no. 2 before the Joint Charity Commissioner.

The petitioner applied for deletion of his name from the cause title on the ground that he is neither a necessary nor a proper party to the revision. The application was however rejected by the Joined Charity Commissioner in the case. Aggrieved by the order, the Petitioner approached the High Court.

Bench’s Verdict

The High Court of Bombay in the case while ordering deletion of Petitioner’s name from the revision application, observed that:

It   is   an   elementary   principle   of   law   that   a   legal proceeding is initiated for redressal of a grievance; it seeks an appropriate relief in response to such grievance.

All those parties in whose absence such grievance cannot be considered or such relief cannot be granted are termed as “necessary parties”, whilst all those other parties whose presence may be considered proper for an effective adjudication of the grievance are “proper parties” to such proceeding. Unless a party qualifies either as a necessary or a proper party, it cannot be joined.

The entire case can be accessed here.