In Indian law, misjoinder of parties has been addressed in several landmark judgments, where courts have consistently held that such procedural defects do not invalidate a suit unless they affect its core substance or jurisdiction. In Prem Lala Nahata v. Chandi Prasad Sikaria, the Supreme Court clarified that misjoinder or non-joinder is a curable irregularity and should not lead to dismissal unless a necessary party is omitted. Similarly, in Mohan Raj v. Surendra Kumar (1969), the Court emphasized that if the law mandates a particular party’s inclusion, their absence may render the proceedings defective. Courts typically invoke Order I, Rules 9 and 10 of the Civil Procedure Code to strike out or add parties at any stage, ensuring justice is served without undue technicality. These rulings reinforce that while procedural precision is vital, the primary aim of the judiciary is to decide cases on their merits rather than penalize technical missteps.
