GANESH PRASAD SONI Vs. RAMESH KUMAR TAMRAKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 31-3-2004 passed by the 3rd Additional District Judge, Bilaspur in Civil Suit No. 5-A/2004, whereby learned Additional District Judge has held that deceased Tulsiram was tenant of deceased Plaintiff Ganesh Prasad and the suit was dismissed on the ground that the Plaintiff has not brought the legal representatives of deceased Tulsirum on record.

(2.) JUDGMENT and decree are challenged on the ground that present Respondent Ramesh Kumar is son of deceased Tulsiram and he is already on record, all legal representatives of deceased Defendant Tulsiram were not necessary party and the Plaintiff was not required to bring all legal representatives of deceased Tulsiram on record.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the Appellants submitted that the Court below has decided all substantial issues in favour of deceased Ganesh Prasad, the original Plaintiff, but has dismissed the suit only on the ground that the Plaintiff has failed to bring all the legal representatives of deceased Tulsiram on record. One legal representative of deceased Tulsiram namely, Defendant Ramesh Kumar is already on record, therefore, the Plaintiff was not required to bring all the legal representatives of deceased Tulsiram on record, even in absence of all legal representatives of the deceased the suit was maintainable. LEARNED Counsel placed reliance in the matter of Chandra Mohan Saha and Anr. v. Union of India and Anr. AIR 1953 Ass 193 (FB) in which it has been held that the patties are required to take objection relating to necessary parry at an early stage and if such objection is not taken at an earlier stage, then it should be deemed to have been waived. If party is represented adequately, failure to make other person as party would not abate the suit or appeal. LEARNED Counsel further placed reliance in the matter of Smt. Swarna Lata Devi v. Krishna Iron Foundry and Metal Works (P) Ltd. : AIR 1974 Cal 393 in which it has been held by the Calcutta High Court that co-sharer brought on record as having certain interest in property is competent to represent entire interests. LEARNED Counsel also placed reliance in the matter of Textile Association (India) Bombay Unit v. Balmohan Gopal Kurup and Anr. : AIR 1990 SC 2053 in which the Apex Court has held that in the case of suit filed by landlord for eviction, if all the interested persons are not made party, decree passed in such suit should be set aside for affording an opportunity of making the interest persons as party.