Defendant In A Plaint Cannot Insist That Plaintiff Should Sue A Third Party: Delhi High Court

Defendant In A Plaint Cannot Insist That Plaintiff Should Sue A Third Party

Case: Aaa Vehicleades Pvt Ltd V. Balkishan Gupta

Coram: Justice C Hari Shankar

Case No.: CM (M) 1674/2019

Court Observation: “A defendant in a plaint cannot insist that the plaintiff should sue a third party. He can only defend the plaint qua the allegations against him. It is open to a defendant to contest his liability, qua the plaintiff, and, in an appropriate case, the defendant may also be entitled to move an application for rejection of the suit outright, if it fails to make out any sustainable cause of action against the plaintiff invoking, for the purpose, Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC,”

“In my view, the impugned decision of the learned ADJ is unexceptionable, both on facts as well as in law. It is, truly, the prerogative of the plaintiff to choose whom to sue. In case the plaintiff sues a party who is not liable, and fails to sue the parties who are liable, she/he does so at her/his own risk and costs,”

Previous Posts

Review Committee Declared Guarantors As Wilful Defaulters Without Making Any Distinction Between Borrower And Guarantor: Kerala High Court

Honorable Exoneration In Departmental Proceedings Would Warrant Quashing Of Criminal Prosecution Arising From Same Set Of Facts: Orissa High Court

Separate IGST On Indian Importers For Ocean Freight Against Concept Of “Composite Supply”, Violates Section 8 CGST Act: Supreme Court

Hindu Succession Act – HUF Property Is Presumed For Be For Widow’s Maintenance When She Has Its Settled & Exclusive Possession: Supreme Court

Continuing Unlawful Activity For Gaining Advantages Other Than Economic Or Pecuniary Is Also An “Organised Crime” Under MCOCA: Supreme Court

Arbitration Reference Not Maintainable If Filed After Admission Of Insolvency Resolution Petition U/s 7 IBC Download Judgement

Company Tribunal Not A Labour Court Or Administrative Tribunal To Focus Entirely On Removal Of Director: Supreme Court In Tata-Mistry Case

Second Appeal: Judgment Should Not Be Interfered With By High Court Unless There Is A Substantial Question Of Law, Reiterates Supreme Court

Proclaimed Offender Declaration Under Section 82(4) CrPC Cannot Be Made Against Person Accused Of Sections 406, 420 IPC