Skip to content

CS Professional · Drafting, Pleadings and Appearances · Pleadings

Meera Textiles Ltd sued two defendants for recovery of dues. On appeal, the defendant argues that the decree must be set aside because one other person, who was a mere proper party and not a necessary party, was not joined in the suit. The merits of the case and the court's jurisdiction were not affected. Applying the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, what is the likely outcome?

The decree will stand. Section 99 prevents reversal or remand in appeal for misjoinder or non-joinder of parties where merits and jurisdiction are unaffected. Only non-joinder of a necessary party is excluded, and the omitted person was merely a proper party.

  1. AThe decree must be reversed because any non-joinder of parties vitiates a decree
  2. BThe decree will not be reversed or remanded on that ground, as the defect does not affect the merits or jurisdictionCorrect
  3. CThe appellate court must remand the case to the trial court for joinder
  4. DThe decree is void because section 99 applies only to misjoinder and not to non-joinder

Explanation

Section 99 bars reversal, substantial variation or remand in appeal for misjoinder or non-joinder of parties or causes of action, where the merits and jurisdiction are not affected. The proviso excludes only non-joinder of a necessary party. Here the missing person is only a proper party, so the proviso does not apply. Option D is wrong because section 99 expressly covers non-joinder.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Pleadings shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise PleadingsFree diagnostic mock

More Pleadings questions