Suit Against Proprietor Maintainable Even Without Trade Name: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has ruled that a lawsuit is not defective merely because the proprietorship firm’s name is missing, as long as the individual proprietor is impleaded as a defendant.

Citing Order XXX, Rule 10 of the CPC, the court held that proceedings can continue against the proprietor personally, ensuring technicalities do not undermine substantive justice. 

The trial court had dismissed the plea, but the High Court allowed it, insisting the suit should have been filed against the trade name.

The Supreme Court overturned that view and restored the trial court’s decision.

[Dogiparthi Venkata Satish and Anr. v Pilla Durga Prasad & Ors.]