SANDEEP THAPAR Vs. SME TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant/Defendant in the Suit sought impleadment of Shri Sharad Maheshwari, Managing Director of the Respondent Company as a Plaintiff and a direction to file an Affidavit supporting the averments in the plaint besides being examined by the Court in IA No.11803/2008 under Order I Rule 10 and Order X Rule 2 read with Section 151 CPC. The Appellant contends that since Mr. Sharad Maheshwari was dealing with the Appellant for and on behalf of the Respondent/Plaintiff Company being its Managing Director, he was a necessary party to the Suit. Learned counsel contends that the entire Suit is based on the oral agreement between the Appellant and Mr. Maheshwari and thus he is a necessary party to the adjudication of the Suit.

(2.) The learned Single Judge dismissed this Application of the Appellant for the reason, the Respondent being a company is persona in law and is entitled to sue in its own name through an authorized representative. In so far as the examination of Shri Sharad Maheshwari under Order X Rule 2 CPC is concerned, it was observed if need be the same will be recorded at the relevant stage.

(3.) We do not find any infirmity in the Impugned Order. The learned Single Judge has rightly held that it is not necessary to implead Shri Sharad Maheshwari as a Plaintiff, as the company being a legal entity is entitled to file a Suit in its own name through an authorized representative. Moreover, it is for the Respondent/Plaintiff to prove its case during the trial and if it does not implead or does not examine Shri Sharad Maheshwari the consequence thereof will flow.