HASEEBULLAH 7TH SEMESTER BATCH 03 5-8/2019A/049

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) order 1 deals with the parties to a civil suit it put down the
rules concerning who may join as a party to a suit and how the court may deal with the joinder
of parties.
Order 1, Rule 1 of the CPC describes who may be joined as a plaintiff, a person who has a legal
interest through a lawsuit and who has hurt harm or injury can join as a plaintiff in a lawsuit
moreover This includes individuals, groups of individuals, corporations, and other legal entities
for example if one company owner terminated several employees they could join together as
plaintiffs in a lawsuit seeking for the relief and compensation in the case of Malik Arshad
Mahmood v. Nadeem Afzal, the Lahore High Court held that joinder of the parties under Order
1, Rule 1 should be allowed when the parties have the same interest in the subject matter of
the suit and the relief sought is the same However it is important that court have authority to
allow or disallow to joinder of the parties based on the specific circumstances of each case.
Order 1, Rule 2 of the CPC describes the Power of the Court to Order separate trials, where the
suit involves more than one claims the court has the power to order separate trials it means if
the case is not closely connected the court may order that each claim be tried separately for
example where a plaintiff files a suit against the defendant for the possession of the property
and also a breach of the contract so in this situation, the court ordered separate trials because
both are different trials and required different evidence moreover in the case of s the case of
Razaq Khan vs. Securities and an Exchange Commission of Pakistan, decided by the Islamabad
High Court in 2021 in this case plaintiffs file a suit against Securities and Exchange Commission
of Pakistan claiming for the termination of wrongful termination of his employment and
declaratory judgment so the court found that both cases are distinct, and are not connected so
court order to make separate trails.
Order 1, Rule 3 of the CPC describes who may be joined as a defendant, any person against
whom a plaintiff is seeking relief of compensation in a civil suit can be joined as a defendant for
example in a theft case a person who stole the car the defendant could be a person who stole
the car or claiming ownership of it in the case of Mehmood Akhtar vs. Naveed Azam was
decided by the Lahore High Court in 2021. In this case, the plaintiff filed a suit for the recovery
of a loan against different defendants however the defendant argued that they had different
defenses and obligations so they could not be joined in the same suit.
Order 1, Rule 4 of the CPC describes Judgment may be given without any amendment it means
the court have power to give judgement as its own way without any changes moreover if the
court is stratified with evidence and arguments before it the court give the judgment in favor of
any party or other without any modifications the reason behind this rule is that justice is
delivered without any delay or complications for example if plaintiff file a suit against defendant
for the breach of contract both presented their arguments the court satisfied with the plaintiff
and found that defendant breach the contract and give the judgment in the favor of plaintiff in
the case of Muhammad Riaz v. Muhammad Iqbal, reported in 2009 CLC 425, the plaintiff filed
a suit for the recovery of a certain amount of money from the defendant the court observe
both parties arguments and give the judgment in the favor of plaintiff the defendant filled
appeal challenging the judgment during the preceding the court observe the defendant had
failed to show any related evidence then The court cited Order 1, Rule 4 of the CPC, stating that
a judgment may be given without any amendment.
Order 1, Rule 5 of the CPC describes Defendant need not be interested in all the relief claimed it
means in a lawsuit it is not important that every defendant shall be interested in all the relief
claimed in any suit against him for ex Ahmed and Ali are neighbors Ahmed’s dog destroyed the
garden of Ali in the lawsuit Ali also names Qudoos as a defendant even Qudoos nothing to do
related the case, Ahmed arguing his son his nothing related to case However, the court
determines that Qudoos has a legitimate interest in the case because he lives with Ahmed
house and the dog on the same property Under Order 1, Rule 5 of the CPC, the court can allow
Qudoos to be named as a defendant in the lawsuit.
Order 1, Rule 6 of the CPC describes Joinder of parties liable on the same contract it means
when two or more parties have the same issue or the same relief the plaintiff brings a single
lawsuit against all of them in a single proceeding for example if a company contract with two
companies both companies failed to supply the raw material the company files the single suit
against both suppliers in the case of Muhammad Iqbal v. Mehran Trading Corporation
Citation: 2016 CLC 693 (Karachi) plaintiff entered into the contract with Mehran Trading
Corporation for the supply of goods the defendant failed to supply the goods then the plaintiff
file a suit against Mehran Trading Corporation and also Khyber Industries, claiming that they
were also liable under the same contract the court give the reference of Order 1, Rule 6 of the
CPC and allowed to the plaintiff to join Khyber Industries as a defendant.
Order 1, Rule 7 describes that When the plaintiff is in doubt from whom redress is to be sought
it means the plaintiff is in doubt about which person or authority will be entitled to obtain the
redress he may join two or more defendants in order to that question which of the defendant is
liable and what to extent in the case of In the case of Suleman v. Muhammad Nawaz and
others (2006 MLD 1588), the Lahore High Court the plaintiff was in doubt whom may be liable
the court also argue that the plaintiff was unsure was who may be liable he may join all the
parties and leave upon the court the court will decide the liability.
Order 1, Rule 8 describes One person may sue or defend on behalf of all in the same interest it
means all people have the same interest in the same lawsuit then one all other person gives
power of attorney to one person and he/she sue or defend behalf of those for ex in the cases of
succession other family members give the power of attorney to one family member he/she sue
or defend behalf of other family members in the case of Ayesha Manzoor and others v.
Government of Punjab and others (2012 CLC 274) the Lahore high court allowed the suit to be
filled on behalf of over 30,000 contract employees of the Punjab government who were seeking
regularization of their employment.
Order 1, Rule 9 describes Mis-joinder and non-joinder it means if a plaintiff includes a party in a
case who has no connection related to the case this will be considered a miss joinder in this
scenario the court has the power to strike out the misjoinder party moreover non-joinder
means a party who should have been joined but it does not include the court has the power to
add the necessary party in the case of Muhammad Akram v. Muhammad Aslam (2018 MLD
574), the Lahore High the court observes that the plaintiff has failed to join the all necessary
party then the court observe and add all the necessary parties.
Order 1, Rule 10 describes a Suit in the name of the wrong plaintiff it means if the suit has been
filled to the wrong plaintiff, then you write the application to court about the correction that I
want to fill a case against this person, for example, you file a suit for illegal occupy for land and
you mentioned the wrong plaintiff in your case now you have to authority under Order 1, Rule
10 for the correction of the plaintiff’s name we have the case PLJ 1975 SC 345 in this case court
give the principal that Persons who have no interest should not be added and or only necessary
or proper parties can be added Not any other parties. A 1951 M 665 moreover persons cannot
be added as parties to add a new cause of action which does not concern the plaintiff at all PLJ
1985 SC 461.
Order 1, Rule 11 describes the Conduct of the suit it means the court has the power to conduct
the case further that who will be the main party, who present the witness, on which behalf the
witness comes to the court, who records the evidence, who give the documents these all works
decide by the court.
Order 1, Rule 12 describes the Appearance of one of several plaintiffs or defendants for others
it means if the plaintiff or defendant is more than one then they can give the authority to
another plaintiff or deferent to proceed with the case on behalf of another plaintiff or
defendant and whatever the judgment we accept it, it is not necessary to appear all the plaintiff
or defendant, you can give the written authority not the verbal.
Order 1, Rule 13 describes Objections as to non-joinder or misjoinder it means if anyone wants
to join as a party or if anyone wants to remove as a party shall be taken at the earliest possible
opportunity however if the court rejects your order 1 Rule 10 application you have the right to
revision that I have the right but court is unable to exercise rightly it that’s why it will be revised
and order to the lower court to consider a party.
Now move on to the other part of the question is that how to decide where a civil suit is to be
filled it talks about the territorial jurisdiction of a civil court section 15 of CPC talks about the
court in which suits are to be instituted, every suit shall be instituted in the court of the lowest
grade you cannot sue the file in the superior court initially you can file the case in civil court
then appeal in district court then high court then the supreme court in 1999 MLD 2104 the
principal was observed that the suit was to be instituted in the court of the lowest grade
competent to try the case but there was no bar for the higher courts to entertain civil suits.
section 16 of CPC talks about suits to be instituted where the subject matter institute
Moreover, if the dispute is related to the immoveable property ownership with or without rent
or profit or partition of immoveable property, you have the right to file a case where the
immovable property is located this is the first priority furthermore if the dispute is regarding
the mortgage, you can file the case where the property is located and where the cause of action
arises.
section 17 of CPC talks about suits for immovable property situate within the jurisdiction of
different courts, if the immovable property is located where the different court jurisdiction
applies it talks about the premises of two different courts in this scenario you can file the case
in any court, there is no restriction, and there are no binding effects.
section 18 of CPC talks about the place of institution of suits where local limits of the
jurisdiction of courts are uncertain, where the limitation is uncertain you don’t know about the
jurisdiction in this situation you can file the case in any court then the court listens to our case
in Bonafede intention and the judgment of the court consider it valid.
section 19 of CPC talks about suits for compensation for wrongs to a person or moveable If the
case is related to the moveable property or personal wrong, personal wrong means assault,
battery, or defamation if the wrong is committed with an individual or moveable property in
this situation you can file the case where the wrongful act commits or you can suit the file
where the defendant lives in other words, we can say that where the cause of action lies, for
example, A, resides in Karachi, beats B in Hyderabad, B may sue A either Karachi or in
Hyderabad.
section 20 of CPC talks about other suits to be instituted where the defendant resides or cause
of action arise, where the defendant resides, where the defendant lives or where the cause of
action arises, and where the defendant is more than one at the time of commencement of the
suit, where the defendant carries his own business or where he is working for the gain in such
cases either the leave of the court is given for example A is a businessman in Karachi, B carries
his own business in Hyderabad. B by his agent in Karachi buys goods for A and requests A to
deliver them to Pakistan International Airways A delivers the goods accordingly in Karachi A
may be sue B for the price of the goods either in Karachi where the cause of action arises or in
Karachi where B carries on business.