MALLESAN @ MALLESH Vs. P SHANTHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order under challenge in the present Civil Revision Petition is against allowing the application seeking for impleadment of the owners of the two wheeler bearing Registration No. TN 29 AD 3655. According to the learned counsel for the second respondent, the accident occurred out of rash and negligence of the two wheeler bearing Registration No. TN 29 AD 3655 as evidenced in the FIR and as such, they are necessary parties in the proceedings before the trial Court. It is on this basis, the second respondent herein had filed the application for impleading the respondents 3 to 6.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner by relying upon the Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in the case of Kheynei vs New India Assurance Co. Ltd., (2015) 9 SCC 273 submitted that the non-impleadment of the other parties would not be fatal to the proceedings and that, since the present case is alleged to be one of composite negligence, one of the joint tort feasors is a sufficient party to the proceedings and the non-impleadment of the other tort feasors is not required.

(3.) The learned counsel for the second respondent on the other hand submits that the FIR clearly discloses the involvement of two wheeler bearing Registration No. TN 29 AD 3655 and as such, the respondents ought to have impleaded them as a party respondent. By not impleading the necessary parties, this respondent should not be burdened to initiate independent proceedings after the award against other tort feasors, which according to him would result in multiplicity of proceedings. It is his further submission that the tribunal had correctly ordered the application made by its respondents by impleading the joint tort feasors as party respondents.