Vijay M.Pai vs A.Ananth
2022 Latest Caselaw 16899 Mad

                                                                                            O.S.A.No.278 of 2022

                                      rIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                         DATED: 27.10.2022

                                                                   CORAM

                                       The Hon'ble Mr. Justice PARESH UPADHYAY
                                                             and
                                  The Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

                                                      O.S.A.No. 278 of 2022
                                                               and
                                                     C.M.P. No.17917 of 2022


                     Vijay M.Pai                                                            .. Appellant

                                                                      vs

                     1.A.Ananth
                     2.P.Surulinarayanasami
                     3.P.Pramila
                     4.Y.Abinesh
                     5.Annapoorna                                                           ..Respondents


                                  Appeal filed under Order XXXVI Rule 9 of Original Side Rules and

                     Clause         15    of   the   Letters       Patent   against   the    judgment      dated

                     29.03.2022 passed in Application No.1348 of 2022 in C.S.No.401 of

                     2019.



                                         For Appellant         :       Mr.S.Ashok Kumar




                     Page 1 of 4


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                               O.S.A.No.278 of 2022



                                                        JUDGMENT

(Delivered by D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY.,J)

1. This appeal is filed against the Order dated 29.03.2022 in

and by which the application in A.No.1348 of 2022 in C.S. No.401 of

2019 filed by the second defendant in the suit to strike his name out of

the array of parties was refused by learned single Judge.

2. Mr.S.Ashok Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of

the appellant submitted that absolutely no relief whatsoever has been

prayed against the appellant herein. The sale deed is referred to in the

plaint and nothing else has been pleaded as against the second

defendant. In that view of the matter, when no relief is prayed and

when no allegations are made against the second defendant, the

second defendant is not a necessary party to the suit and, therefore,

the learned single Judge ought to have allowed the application.

3. We have considered the submissions made on behalf of the

appellant and perused the material records of the case.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis O.S.A.No.278 of 2022

4. It may be seen that the suit is for rendition of accounts as

against the first defendant who was the power of attorney of the

plaintiff. Averments are made that the first defendant/agent has sold

the property to the second defendant viz., the appellant herein. In that

view of the matter, so as to determine whether any sale consideration

was paid , if so the quantum, time etc., the second defendant is very

much a proper party, even though the second defendant may not be

necessary party as far as the relief prayed for is concerned. Therefore,

the learned single Judge is right in refusing the application.

5. In the result, the appeal is without merits and the same is

dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is

closed.

(P.U., J) (D.B.C., J) 27.10.2022 Index:Yes/No mmi/2

To

The Sub Assistant Registrar, Original Side, High Court, Madras.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis O.S.A.No.278 of 2022

PARESH UPADHYAY, J.

and D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

mmi

O.S.A.No.278 of 2022

27.10.2022

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis