Kerala HC: Can’t Condone Delay in Approaching Revision Authority Under Income Tax Act  ||  Karnataka HC: Scope of Judicial Review in Contractual Matters is Extremely Limited  ||  Bom. HC: Release of Film ‘Hamare Baarah’ Permitted After Agreement on Deletion of Certain Portions  ||  All. HC: Without Magistrate’s Permission, Investigation into Non-Cognizable Offence Illegal  ||  Himachal Pradesh High Court: Timeline Cannot be Imposed on Speakers to Decide Resignations of MLAs  ||  Ker. HC: In Quashing Proc. Courts to Look at All Circumstances to See if Case Initiated With Malice  ||  Kar. HC: Women Epicentres of Family Life, Deserve Preferential Treatment in Matters Relating to Bail  ||  Ker. HC: Order Holding Malabar Parota Similar to Bread and Exigible at 5% GST, Stayed  ||  Special Lok Adalat to be Organized by the Supreme Court from July 29  ||  Cal. HC: Bengal Govt. to Ensure Reservation in all Public Employment to Transgender Persons    

Lottostar (Pty) Ltd. and Others vs.Ithuba Holdings (Pty) Ltd. And Others - (05 Sep 2023)

To avoid multiplicity of proceedings and unnecessary expense, Court will in general order the joinder of parties


The issue raised in present case is whether it was open to present Court to enter into the merits and make an order on appeal, absent the joinder of certain other parties, who, so the Appellants contended, have an interest in the result of present proceedings.

Where parties before a court reference matters that require consideration going beyond the original conception of the case, this may engage the interests of third parties not before the court. A court will in general order the joinder of parties, to ensure that all parties interested in the subject-matter of the dispute and whose rights may be affected by its judgment are before it, so as to avoid a multiplicity of proceedings and to avoid a waste of costs. Substantial costs have already been incurred in the prosecution of the present proceedings and a great deal of court time has been invested in them. Those could probably be rendered worthless.

The attorneys for the NLR and NGB are directed to: (i) notify each of the further parties of these proceedings and of the order granted by the full court and cause a copy of this judgment to be served on them; and (ii) indicate in that notice that a copy of all of the papers in the application will lie for inspection at their offices for a period of two weeks from the date of such notification and (iii) thereafter, make a return, on affidavit, to the Registrar of this court setting out what steps have been taken in compliance with the directions.


Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved