Yes, non-joinder of a necessary party can lead to dismissal if the defect is not rectified even after an objection has been raised and an opportunity to correct it has been given. Courts hold that when a party whose presence is essential for a complete and binding judgment is absent, the case cannot be effectively decided, and continuing the proceedings would be futile. Under Order I Rule 9 and Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), a suit is not to be dismissed for non-joinder unless the missing party is indispensable—meaning no valid decree can be passed without them. To deal with this, lawyers should immediately file an impleadment application once an objection is raised, showing diligence and good faith in curing the defect. If adding the party is impossible due to jurisdictional or legal barriers, counsel should submit a written explanation demonstrating that the case can still proceed fairly, often supported by precedents and affidavits. To prevent dismissal, top lawyers maintain a comprehensive pre-filing party checklist, review all connected interests early, and stay alert for any objection during proceedings. This proactive and transparent approach ensures procedural compliance while protecting the client’s case from avoidable technical setbacks.
